3 total
Costs awarded to plaintiff after mixed result in cottage ownership dispute.
Costs decision following a property dispute in which both parties claimed title to a cottage.
The plaintiff advanced claims based on proprietary estoppel and unjust enrichment, while the defendant estate sought clear title.
The trial judgment granted the plaintiff a 15‑year licence to use the property, producing a mixed outcome.
In determining costs, the court considered proportionality and the factors under s.131(1) of the Courts of Justice Act and Rule 57 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, as well as settlement offers that did not engage Rule 49.
Finding the plaintiff was more successful overall, the court ordered the defendant estate to pay the plaintiff fixed costs of $50,000 all‑inclusive.
Equity grants long‑term cottage licence after reliance on inheritance promise.
The plaintiff sought enforcement of an alleged promise that a cottage would be left to her by will after she maintained, improved, and paid expenses for the property over approximately 25 years.
The estate denied that any enforceable promise existed and argued the plaintiff’s use of the cottage offset her expenditures.
The court found that the deceased had repeatedly encouraged the belief that the cottage would eventually be left to the plaintiff and that she relied on that expectation by investing significant labour and money into the property.
The court held that the elements of proprietary estoppel and unjust enrichment were established.
Instead of granting ownership or a monetary award, the court imposed an equitable remedy granting the plaintiff a 15‑year exclusive licence to occupy the cottage subject to payment of taxes, insurance, and utilities.
Court coordinates dozens of construction lien actions without full consolidation.
Multiple motions arose in more than 45 construction lien actions concerning five related solar farm projects across Eastern Ontario.
The plaintiff sought transfer and consolidation of numerous lien actions, while the general contractor sought reduction of security posted to vacate liens under the Construction Lien Act.
The court declined full consolidation, instead designating “main actions” for each project and implementing procedural directions to coordinate litigation efficiently while avoiding administrative burdens associated with transferring and merging dozens of proceedings.
The court partially granted the motion to reduce security where duplicate or inflated lien claims were conceded, while adjourning the balance pending further negotiations and analysis of holdback exposure and overlapping claims.
