Pat Santini

The plaintiff was successful on a motion to strike a jury notice due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The parties agreed that $15,000 represented partial indemnity costs for the motion.

The defendants argued that costs should be reserved to the trial judge or reduced due to the novel facts and mixed results.

The court rejected these arguments, finding the plaintiff was largely successful and the applicable legal test was well-settled despite the novel factual context.

Costs of $15,000 were awarded to the plaintiff payable forthwith.

The plaintiff sued the defendant municipality, alleging it was overcharged for wastewater services because the municipality billed based on the volume of water supplied rather than the lesser volume of wastewater actually discharged.

The defendant brought a motion for summary judgment.

The court granted the motion, finding that section 394(1)(c) of the Municipal Act, 2001 does not prohibit a municipality from charging for wastewater services based on water supplied, as the municipality actually provided the service and the fee was a reasonable estimate of cost recovery.

The court also held that the municipality's billing method was a policy decision protected by statutory immunity.