Paul R. Jewell

The Court of Appeal issued supplementary reasons regarding a costs order from a previous appeal decision.

The defendants (appellants) objected to the court's direction that an assessment officer determine whether the trial was prolonged by the defendants' failure to meaningfully respond to a request to admit, which would entitle the plaintiffs to solicitor-and-client costs for the additional time.

The defendants argued the assessment officer lacked the ability to make this determination without further instruction.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the objection, finding that the assessment officer has the authority and experience to perform the task and that no further direction was needed.

The 14-year-old deceased was killed when a handball net toppled onto him during a physical education class.

His parents and sister successfully sued the school board.

The jury awarded $100,000 to each parent and $50,000 to the sister for loss of guidance, care, and companionship under the Family Law Act.

The trial judge also awarded the plaintiffs solicitor-and-client costs.

The school board appealed the damages and costs.

The Court of Appeal upheld the parents' awards as high but within the accepted range, but reduced the sister's award to $25,000 as inordinately high.

The costs order was varied to party-and-party costs, as the plaintiffs' settlement offers did not comply with Rule 49.10.