CITATION: Hamilton v. Nanji, 2011 ONSC 2395
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 434/10
DATE: 20110413
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
FERRIER, BALTMAN AND LEDERER JJ.
BETWEEN:
HEYDARY HAMILTON PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Appellant
(Responding Party)
– and –
RAHEMIN NANJI
Respondent
(Moving Party)
David Keith Alderson, for the Appellant
Hari S. Nesathurai, for the Respondent
HEARD at Toronto: April 13, 2011
LEDERER J. (orally)
[1] There is nothing wrong with the decision of the Assessment Officer or the consideration of Belobaba J. on the appeal. The Assessment Officer was within his authority when he discounted the contribution to the file of the two senior lawyers. The evidence before him was in dockets that were served but not in a fashion that complied with the requirements of the Evidence Act. Thus, the client had no reason to anticipate the dockets would be relied on as business records or that the solicitors involved would not be present.
[2] The affidavits from the two senior lawyers were served on February 2, 2010. The assessment was conducted on February 4 and 5, 2010. As a practical matter, there was no opportunity to cross examine. It was open to the Assessment Officer to find that this evidence should not be relied on because in the absence of the lawyers involved, there was no opportunity to question it.
[3] The answer that the client could have asked for the lawyers to attend, ignores that the Assessment Officer was advised that the time of the senior lawyers was more valuable than attending the hearing and that the assessment had been scheduled for the previous September and delayed because no lawyers involved in the file were present. The appeal is dismissed.
FERRIER J.
COSTS
[4] We are of the view that the respondent should recover costs in the sum of $4,000 plus HST.
FERRIER J.
BALTMAN J.
LEDERER J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: April 13, 2011
Date of Release: April 27, 2011
CITATION: Hamilton v. Nanji, 2011 ONSC 2395
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 434/10
DATE: 20110413
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
FERRIER, BALTMAN AND LEDERER JJ.
BETWEEN:
HEYDARY HAMILTON PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Appellant
(Responding Party)
– and –
RAHEMIN NANJI
Respondent
(Moving Party)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LEDERER J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: April 13, 2011
Date of Release: April 27, 2011