Court File and Parties

CITATION: Olumide v. Metrolinx, 2014 ONSC 3475

COURT FILE NO.: 512/13

DATE: 20140609

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

IN THE DIVISIONAL COURT AT TORONTO

RE: Ade Olumide, Applicant

AND:

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Ontario (The “Crown”) and Metrolinx, Respondents

BEFORE: Kiteley J.

COUNSEL: Self-Represented, Applicant

Domenic Polla, for the Respondent, Her Majesty the Queen

Paul Schabas and Kaley Pulfer, for the Respondent, Metrolinx

HEARD: in writing

ENDORSEMENT AS TO COSTS

[1] On April 7, 2014, I released reasons for decision[^1] in which I dismissed the Applicant’s motion for public interest and for private interest standing and I dismissed the Notice of Application and created a timetable for the delivery of written submissions as to costs of the motion. On April 14^th I received written submissions as to costs on behalf of each respondent and on April 28^th I received the Applicant’s submissions.

[2] Counsel for Metrolinx asks for costs in the amount of $4324.87 on a partial indemnity basis which was described as substantially reduced from the actual costs and reflected use of a Student-at-Law and filing joint materials with the Crown. The Crown asks for costs in the amount of $4,000 which is a reduction from the total partial indemnity costs in the amount of $7853.

[3] In his submissions, the Applicant takes these positions: (a) he should not be ordered to pay any costs; (b) trying to prosecute his claims has cost him in money and in time; (c) he made an offer to settle which Metrolinx did not accept; (d) he has already been ordered to pay costs on other steps in proceedings. Other than comment that the amounts sought are too high, he makes no specific submissions as to any of the details in the costs outlines. The Applicant’s main position is that he continues to insist on the wisdom and the merits of the claims he had asserted in the Notice of Application. He repeats some of what was contained in the Notice of Application in a manner similar to what I earlier described as indecipherable and insists on wanting to continue with a proceeding that I held was not salvageable.

[4] The written submissions by the Applicant are of no assistance in my assessment of the claims for costs on behalf of the Respondents.

[5] The Respondents were successful and are entitled to costs on a partial indemnity scale. The conduct of the Applicant caused unnecessary delay and expense. He deliberately did not comply with an order as to cross-examination and, as at the hearing of the motion on March 19^th, had not paid the outstanding costs orders. The issues raised in the motion were important with significant impact on the Respondents. The offer to settle as he described it was unintelligible. The costs outlines indicate that less senior members of the firms were engaged appropriately. In the case of the Crown, the amount requested has been considerably discounted. Since there had been prior orders for costs against the Applicant, it had to be contemplated that he was exposed to costs of this sort as a result of the motion and such amounts were therefor within his reasonable contemplation. I agree that the costs sought are fair and proportional to the issues and the importance of the proceeding.

ORDER TO GO AS FOLLOWS:

[6] The Applicant shall pay to the Respondent Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Ontario the sum of $4,000 as to costs (inclusive of fees, disbursements and HST).

[7] The Applicant shall pay to the Respondent Metrolinx the sum of $4324.87 as to costs (inclusive of fees, disbursements and HST).

[8] Counsel for the Respondents may take out the order as to costs without approval as to form and content from the Applicant.

Kiteley J.

Date: June 9, 2014

[^1]: 2014 ONSC 1940