COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE:
GEORGE PALICHUK (Plaintiff (Respondent)) – and – SNC-LAVALIN ENGINEERS AND CONSTRUCTORS INC. (Defendant (Appellant))
BEFORE:
CARTHY, MOLDAVER AND CRONK JJ.A.
COUNSEL:
R.S.M. Woods
For the appellant
Christopher J. Dockrill
For the respondent
HEARD:
October 9, 2001
On appeal from the judgment of Justice N. Douglas Coo dated October 27, 1999.
E N D O R S E M E N T
1We agree with the trial judge that there was no enforceable termination term governing the period of notice. A common law assessment was appropriate and the trial judge’s assessment based on six months salary, while high, was not so high as to justify interference. The trial judge released his reasons one day after a two-day trial and was obviously aware of the plaintiff’s evidence as to what he considered reasonable notice. We are satisfied that this evidence was considered along with the other factors listed in his endorsement in arriving at what the trial judge thought was reasonable notice.
2In the question of costs, the trial judge did not have the benefit of this court’s decision in Rooney v. Graham C33433, released March 27, 2001. The respondent concedes that the amount of solicitor and client costs to be added to the party and party costs to the date of trial would exceed the difference between the base offer and the base recovery. Therefore, the costs should have been on a party and party scale.
3Leave to appeal costs is granted and the appeal in that respect allowed. Otherwise the appeal is dismissed. Success is divided and there will therefore be no costs.
“J.J. Carthy J.A.”
“M.J. Moldaver J.A.”
“E.A. Cronk J.A.”