P. Peter Diavolitsis

The plaintiffs suffered a fire at their home and submitted a claim to their insurer, the defendant.

A dispute arose over repair and living expenses, leading the plaintiffs to issue a notice of action.

However, they failed to serve and file a statement of claim within the required 30 days.

The plaintiffs brought a motion for leave to extend the time to serve and file the statement of claim.

The defendant opposed, arguing the limitation period had expired.

The court granted the motion, finding that the defendant had been promptly notified of the loss, had investigated the claim, and would not suffer significant prejudice by the extension.

The defendant owner brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's claim and the co-defendant insurer's cross-claim against her.

The owner's son, whose license was suspended, took her vehicle without her knowledge or consent while she was sleeping and was involved in a collision.

The court applied the test for vicarious liability under the Highway Traffic Act, finding that the owner had not relinquished possession or control of the vehicle to her son.

The motion for summary judgment was granted and the claims against the owner were dismissed.

The defendants were successful on a motion to produce a document over which the plaintiff had asserted solicitor-client privilege.

The defendants sought costs of $11,406 on a partial indemnity basis, while the plaintiff submitted a bill of costs for $3,566.52.

The court found the defendants' claimed hours excessive for a relatively straightforward motion and emphasized the principle of proportionality.

Applying Rule 57, the court fixed costs payable to the defendants at $5,000 plus HST and disbursements.