Weld v. Ottawa Public Library, 2019 ONSC 5896

CITATION: Weld v. Ottawa Public Library, 2019 ONSC 5896

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DC-18-2401

DATE: 20191022

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

DIVISIONAL COURT

RE: MADELINE WELD AND VALERIE THOMAS

Applicants

AND:

OTTAWA PUBLIC LIBRARY

Respondent

BEFORE: Aston, S.T. Bale and Favreau JJ.

COUNSEL: Alan Honner Gabriel Poliquin and Charles Daoust

for the Applicants for the Respondent

HEARD at Toronto: in writing

ENDORSEMENT AS TO COSTS

[1] In a decision released on September 16, 2019, this Court dismissed the applicants' application for judicial review. At the conclusion of the decision, we gave the parties an opportunity to make submissions on costs in writing. This endorsement addresses the issue of costs.

[2] The respondent submits that it should receive its costs given that it was successful on the application. The respondent seeks partial indemnity costs in the amount of $41,059, plus disbursements in the amount of $1,609.75.

[3] The applicants do not dispute that the respondent is entitled to costs. However, they argue that the amount sought by the respondent is excessive. The applicants point to their own full indemnity costs, which are approximately $21,000. They also argue that some of the amounts claimed do not fall within the scope of partial indemnity costs and that the time spent on various tasks is disproportionate to the issues in the case. The applicants do not suggest an alternative amount that they would view as fair and reasonable.

[4] In determining the costs of a proceeding, the Court is to consider the factors set out in Rule 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, including the principle of indemnity, the amount claimed, the complexity of the procedure, and the importance of the issues.

[5] The Court is also to consider the principles established by the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Boucher v. Public Accountants Council (Ontario), 2009 ONCA 722, 100 O.R. (3d) 66 (C.A.), including that the objective of fixing costs is to set an amount that is fair and reasonable in the circumstances of the case.

[6] We agree with the applicants that the amount sought by the respondent is excessive. The rates charged by the individual lawyers are reasonable. However, the hours spent and the number of lawyers involved do not seem proportionate to the issues in the litigation. There was some complexity to the legal issues, but none of the facts were in dispute.

[7] In all of the circumstances, in our view, $25,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST is reasonable. We therefore order that the applicants are to pay the respondents costs in the amount of $25,000 all inclusive.

FAVREAU J.

I agree _______________________________

ASTON J.

I agree _______________________________

S.T. BALE J.

Date: October 22, 2019