M. Cruickshank

The defendant successfully obtained summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff's $2.2 million defamation claim and sought partial indemnity costs of $8,836.76.

The plaintiff opposed the costs award, arguing that the defendant used salaried in-house counsel and that a costs award would have a chilling effect, while also requesting a sealing order in her costs submissions.

The court dismissed the sealing order request for failing to follow proper procedure.

The court awarded the defendant its requested costs, confirming that in-house lawyers are entitled to seek costs on an equal basis to external lawyers and finding the amount reasonable and proportionate.

The plaintiff sued the Niagara Regional Police Services Board for defamation and other torts arising from a 2019 arrest and a subsequent 2021 police report.

The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the claim was statute-barred.

The court granted the motion, finding that the plaintiff failed to provide the mandatory written notice under section 5 of the Libel and Slander Act, which acts as an absolute bar to the defamation action.

The court also noted that the police reports were protected by qualified privilege.

Following the successful motions by the defendants to strike the plaintiff's claim, the court determined the quantum of costs to be awarded.

The court found that the plaintiff's claim had no chance of success and that he should pay costs on a partial indemnity scale.

The court awarded costs of $11,884.36 to the Transit Commission, $6,736.81 to Commissionaires Hamilton, and $3,333.09 to the Police Services Board.

The self-represented plaintiff sued the transit commission, a security company, and the police board after he was issued a trespass notice for using offensive language at a bus terminal and subsequently removed by police when he refused to leave.

The defendants brought motions to dismiss the action.

The court found that the plaintiff's pleadings, which included allegations of assault and defamation, did not disclose any genuine issue requiring a trial.

The claims were dismissed without leave to amend.

Following the dismissal of the plaintiff's action for assault and negligence against the police board and an officer, the defendants sought costs of approximately $65,000.

The plaintiff argued for $15,000.

The court noted the plaintiff's unreasonable settlement expectations and the defendants' sincere, though non-compliant, Rule 49 offer.

The court fixed costs payable by the plaintiff to the defendants at $35,000 on a partial indemnity basis.

The plaintiff sued a police officer and the police services board for assault and negligence following a traffic stop and arrest.

The plaintiff, who was pulled over by an unmarked police car for speeding, claimed he did not realize the officer was police and alleged the arrest caused him physical soreness and severe PTSD.

The court dismissed the action, finding the officer had reasonable grounds to arrest the plaintiff for evading police and used minimal force.

The court also held that the plaintiff's alleged psychiatric injury was not foreseeable, as it stemmed from his peculiar personality structure rather than the defendants' actions.