Court File and Parties

CITATION: Walsh v. 1124660 Ontario Limited, 2008 ONCA 522

DATE: 20080630

DOCKET: C45641

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

DOHERTY, ROSENBERG and CRONK JJ.A.

BETWEEN:

CHARLENE WALSH

Appellant

and

1124660 ONTARIO LIMITED, BRIGITTE REGENSCHEIT, P.C. ANDREW MAY #1767, P.C. JIM STRAVRAKIS #99462

Respondents

Ernest J. Guiste for the appellant

David Shiller for the respondents, 1124660 Ontario Limited and Regenscheit Diana W. Dimmer and Mark Siboni for the respondents, May and Stravrakis

Heard: May 14 and 16, 2008

On appeal from the judgment of Justice Dennis Lane of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury, dated June 2, 2006.

COSTS ENDORSEMENT

[1] We have considered the submissions of counsel and the appellant’s affidavit in which she claims to have no assets with which to pay any costs order.

[2] The respondents were entirely successful at trial. The trial judge made no order as to costs given the appellant’s impecuniousity. The respondents, to their credit, did not challenge that exercise of the trial judge’s discretion.

[3] The appellant chose to pursue an appeal. Once again, the respondents have been totally successful. The respondents have incurred further legal costs. They should not be deprived of their costs a second time.

[4] Costs to the “police” respondents in the amount of $4,000. Costs to the “Tim Horton’s” respondents in the amount of $7,000. Costs are inclusive of disbursements and GST.

[5] The respondents will no doubt have regard to the appellant’s financial circumstances when determining what steps, if any, should be taken to enforce this order.

“Doherty J.A.”

“M. Rosenberg J.A.”

“E.A. Cronk J.A.”