CITATION: 1117322 Ontario Inc, v. Telus Corporation, 2010 ONCA 262
DATE: 20100409
DOCKET: C51252
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Gillese, Lang and Rouleau JJ.A.
BETWEEN:
1117322 Ontario Inc. and Joseph O’Regan
Appellants
and
Telus Corporation
Respondent
Joseph O’Regan, appellant appearing in person and on behalf of 1117322 Ontario Inc.
Jaimie Lickers, for the respondent
Heard: April 8, 2010
On appeal from the order of Justice Heidi Polowin of the Superior Court of Justice dated October 6, 2009.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
[1] Mr. O’Regan argues that fairness considerations are such that the doctrine of res judicata ought not to apply in the circumstances of this case. He points to the fact that he sought only a small sum for damages in the Small Claims Court action. In that action, he recovered damages for approximately $6,000. In the present action, he seeks millions of dollars. He also complains that fairness considerations flow from the amount of time and money he has spent pursuing this second action.
[2] The motion judge was fully alive to these considerations. Nonetheless, as she noted, both claims arise out of the same business relationship and estoppel bars claims which might properly have been brought in the first action. Further, as she noted, the Charter claims in the second action are not well-formed.
[3] We accept the respondent’s arguments as to why Becamon v. Wawanesa Mutual Ins. Co., 2009 ONCA 113, is of no assistance to the appellant. In Becamon, the proceedings were different and so too were the roles of the parties. There, the young driver pled guilty to Highway Traffic Act offences and wanted to defend fully a subsequent civil action. Here, the appellants were the plaintiffs in both actions.
[4] The motion judge applied the correct legal principles. She fully, fairly and carefully considered all aspects of the actions and the arguments presented by the parties. We see no basis on which to interfere with her decisions.
[5] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent fixed at $2,000, all inclusive, if so sought by the respondent.