4 total
Costs award for abandoned application reduced from $187,682 to $63,000 as excessive and unreasonable.
The appellants abandoned an application for judicial review and the respondents were awarded costs fixed at $187,682.51 on a partial indemnity basis.
The appellants appealed the costs order, arguing the costs should have been referred for assessment and that the amount was excessive.
The Court of Appeal held that the motions judge did not err in fixing the costs rather than referring them for assessment.
However, the Court found the costs awarded were excessive and not fair and reasonable, noting the amount was virtually the same as a substantial indemnity award and the proceedings relied on the same record as an earlier application.
The appeal was allowed and the costs award was reduced to $63,000.
Appeal of accounting licence revocation dismissed due to appellant's breach of undertaking and failure to cooperate.
The appellant, a chartered accountant, appealed the revocation of his public accounting licence by the Public Accountants Council of Ontario.
The appellant's licence was initially subject to revocation due to his bankruptcy, but the Council adjourned the hearing on conditions, including an undertaking not to practice.
The appellant breached the undertaking, failed to cooperate with inspections, and failed to attend the reconvened hearing.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding ample evidence to support the revocation and concluding that the Council acted reasonably in proceeding in the appellant's absence.
Actual knowledge of third-party reliance defeated the management-accountant exemption.
The Crown appealed an acquittal entered on appeal from a provincial offences conviction for practising as a public accountant without a licence.
The court held that a Certified General Accountant who prepared a stub financial statement for a share purchaser, and financial statements knowingly used by a bank, fell outside the management-accountant exemption in s. 34 because he had actual knowledge that third parties would use and rely on the statements.
The court further held that preparation of corporate income tax returns and attached financial statements did not constitute practising as a public accountant because the representations were those of the taxpayer, not the preparer.
A vagueness challenge to the statutory scheme under s. 7 of the Charter failed.
The acquittal was set aside and the conviction restored.
Special leave granted on scope of management accountant exemption.
The applicant sought special leave to appeal from a summary conviction appeal decision concerning the interpretation of the management accountant exemption in s. 34 of the Public Accountancy Act.
The chambers judge held the proposed appeal raised a question of law alone, and that uncertainty remained in the jurisprudence concerning whether disclosure or intended use of management-prepared statements by third parties could disentitle an accountant to the exemption.
Because the issue was important in the public interest, relevant to the due administration of justice, and likely to recur, special leave to appeal was granted.
