CITATION: Taucar v. University of Western Ontario, 2011 ONSC 6593
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 1854
DATE: 20110823
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
MATLOW, KENT and ASTON, J.J.
B E T W E E N :
Haruyo Taucar
Applicant
– and –
The University of Western Ontario; and Kenneth Paul Swan, c.o.b. Kenneth P. Swan Arbitration Ltd.
Respondents
C.E. Taucar, for the Applicant
Christopher Riggs, for the Respondent, the University of Western Ontario
HEARD: April 14, 2011 at London
MATLOW, J.:
[1] This endorsement is made pursuant to our judgment in this application dated May 31, 2011 and sets out our decision with respect to costs.
[2] The respondent university is entitled to recover costs, fixed on a partial indemnity basis at $15,000, all-inclusive, from the applicant, payable forthwith.
[3] Counsel for the university, in his bill of costs delivered together with his written submissions, provided details supporting the fixing of costs at $22,102.80 but concluded his submissions by asking us, “having regard to all of the circumstances”, to fix costs “in the range of $10,000 to $15,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST”.
[4] We see no reason to depart from the general rule that costs should follow the event. As well, we are satisfied that the amount now awarded is fair and reasonable having regard to the general principles set out in rule 57.01 (1).
[5] Counsel for the applicant submitted that our award should not exceed $5,000 having regard to what he described as the importance of the issues, the non-monetary nature of the proceedings, the reasonable expectation of the unsuccessful party, the principles of fairness and reasonableness and the complexity of the proceedings.
[6] It continues to be our view that the application served no public benefit but was brought only to advance the personal interests of the applicant. It was based on numerous volumes of material and was presented in a laborious and tedious manner that reflected poor judgment and served no useful purpose. Some examples of this were given in our earlier reasons. As well, her counsel’s approach consumed extensive time that added significantly to the costs of this litigation of the university.
[7] There is, accordingly, no good reason why the applicant should now be spared from the monetary consequences of the risks that she should have taken into account before she embarked on this futile exercise.
Matlow, J.
Kent, J.
Aston, J.
Released: August 23, 2011
CITATION: Taucar v. University of Western Ontario, 2011 ONSC 6593
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 1854
DATE: 20110823
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N :
MATLOW, KENT and ASTON, J.J.
Haruyo Taucar
Applicant
– and –
The University of Western Ontario; and Kenneth Paul Swan, c.o.b. Kenneth P. Swan Arbitration Ltd.
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
MATLOW J.
RELEASED: August 23, 2011