Sigesmund v. Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario, 2005 CanLII 41548 (ON SCDC)

ENDORSEMENT ON COSTS

1Dr. Sigesmund was found guilty on multiple counts of professional misconduct. He was successful in having the most serious infractions set aside and a new hearing directed based upon a single ground of appeal, namely, the failure of the Discipline Committee panel to allow Dr. Mulrooney to testify as an expert witness on his behalf.

2Though largely successful in the result, Dr. Sigesmund was unsuccessful on all of his other grounds for appeal. Those other grounds took up at least 90% of the time on this appeal, namely, his assertion that there was a resonable apprehension of bias on the part of Dr. Krueger and the panel. The motion to introduce fresh evidence on appeal was granted, but that fresh evidence was of no assistance to Dr. Sigesmund on the main ground of appeal, reasonable apprehension of bias, because this court specifically ruled against him on that particular ground.

3Had the court accepted the main ground of appeal, all convictions would have been set aside. The College is therefore at least partially successful in the result.

4Considering that the College’s more modest success in the outcome is balanced by the fact that it was successful on the issue that overwhelmingly accounted for the time and expense of this appeal, a good argument can be made that there be no order for costs.

5Nevertheless, we have concluded that we should not depart from the usual rule that costs should follow the event but in a diminished quantum.

6The appellant asks us to fix and award costs to him in the sum of $132,868.19. However, applying the principles articulated by the Court of Appeal in Boucher v Public Accountants Council for the Province of Ontario (2004), 71 O.R. (3d) 291 which guide this court in determining what is fair and reasonable, we award costs to the appellant fixed by reference to the partial indemnity scale at $15,000.

Matlow J.

Pitt J.

Aston J.