Michelle Simard

Following a three‑day civil trial arising from a physical altercation at a banquet dinner, the plaintiff succeeded and was awarded damages.

The remaining issue concerned the appropriate costs award.

The court considered the plaintiff’s offer to settle, the defendant’s unsuccessful limitation defence, and the conduct of the trial under the simplified procedure, including excessive cross‑examination by defence counsel.

Applying Rule 57 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court found the plaintiff’s costs position reasonable and awarded the full amount claimed.

The plaintiff brought a civil action for damages arising from an alleged assault at a banquet after a dispute over a bottle of wine.

The defendant argued the claim was statute-barred and alternatively asserted self-defence.

The court held that although the Superior Court action was commenced outside the two‑year limitation period, the defendant effectively waived reliance on the limitation defence through counsel’s conduct when consenting to the withdrawal of a timely Small Claims Court action after a parallel Superior Court claim was issued.

On the merits, the court found the defendant was the primary aggressor and that the force used was neither reasonable nor proportionate to any threat.

The plaintiff was awarded damages for dental injuries and related losses.