2012 ONSC 5101
COURT FILE NO.: DC-11-0015
DATE: 20120911
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
Hennessy, Tucker and Shaw JJ.
BETWEEN:
United General Contracting Ltd.
Respondent
(Plaintiff)
– and –
The Corporation of the Municipality of Sioux Lookout, Stantec Consulting Ltd. and Keewatin-Aski Ltd.
Appellants
(Defendants)
Morris J. Holervich, for the Respondent (Plaintiff)
Peter J. Mitchell, for the Appellants (Defendants)
HEARD: Written Submissions
ENDORSEMENT ON COSTS
hENNESSY J.:
[1] The parties made written submissions on costs.
[2] There is no issue that there should be costs to the respondents on the appeal, United General Contracting Ltd. They were successful. The appeal was dismissed.
[3] The respondents ask for costs on a full indemnity basis, but do not identify any factor which would support this request. We see nothing in the conduct or character of this matter to support this request. The appellants take no issue with the quantum of costs on a partial indemnity basis.
[4] Costs of the appeal, therefore, to the respondents on a partial indemnity basis in the amount of $6,209.88 inclusive of disbursements and HST.
[5] The parties both requested their costs for the motion for leave to appeal heard by Greer J. The appellants were successful on the motion and Greer J. left the issue of costs to this court hearing the appeal.
[6] In support of their request for costs, the respondents on appeal, although unsuccessful on the leave motion, argue that they incurred costs even though their position has been sustained throughout. This argument does not persuade us to award costs to the respondents for a motion on which they did not succeed.
[7] The appellants on appeal submit that either costs should follow the event on the leave motion or in the alternative that there should be no costs on the leave motion since success was divided between the leave motion and appeal was ultimately divided.
[8] We agree with the alternative submission of the appellant.
[9] In view of the divided success, we are of the view that there should be no costs on the leave motion.
Hennessy J.
Tucker J.
Shaw J.
Released: September 11, 2012
2012 ONSC 5101
COURT FILE NO.: DC-11-0015
DATE: 20120911
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
Hennessy, Tucker and Shaw JJ.
BETWEEN:
United General Contracting Ltd.
Respondent
(Plaintiff)
– and –
The Corporation of the Municipality of
Sioux Lookout, Stantec Consulting Ltd.
and Keewatin-Aski Ltd.
Appellants
(Defendants)
ENDORSEMENT ON COSTS
Hennessy J.
Released: September 11, 2012