Court File and Parties

CITATION: New Solutions Extrusion Corporation v. Gauthier, 2010 ONCA 348

DATE: 20100512

DOCKET: C51809

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

Doherty, Cronk and MacFarland JJ.A.

BETWEEN

New Solutions Extrusion Corporation

Plaintiff (Appellant in Appeal)

and

Jacques Gauthier, Gauthier & Associates, and Myrna Tulandi

Defendants (Respondents in Appeal)

Counsel:

Christopher Du Vernet and Carlin McGoogan, for the appellant

Sean Dewart and Timothy Gleason, for the respondents

Heard: May 11, 2010

On appeal from the Order of Justice A. Karakatsanis of the Superior Court of Justice, dated February 12, 2010.

APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT

[1] The motion judge concluded that there was an insufficient factual basis to establish or infer that the respondents agreed with their client to engage in unlawful conduct. That finding is overwhelmingly supported by this record, in particular, by the appellant’s own admissions under oath, through its representatives, that its material allegations against the respondents were based entirely on assumptions, speculation and embellishment. Accordingly, there is no basis on which to interfere with the motion judge’s disposition.

[2] We note that it is neither necessary nor appropriate in this case to address the effect of the recent amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure regarding summary judgment procedures.

[3] Finally, leave to appeal the motion judge’s costs award is denied. Her costs order was amply justified on this record.

[4] The respondents are entitled to their costs of the appeal. In the particular circumstances of this case, we fix those costs in the total amount of $16,478.18, including disbursements and G.S.T., on the substantial indemnity scale. That scale of costs is appropriate here for the reasons relied on by the motion judge in her reasons concerning costs and, as well, because the appeal was entirely meritless.