R.D. Rollo

The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident while a passenger in a taxi.

The taxi collided with a vehicle owned by the defendant mother and driven by her unlicensed, intoxicated son.

The mother's insurer brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's uninsured coverage claims, arguing the son had implied consent to drive.

The mother brought a cross-motion to dismiss the action against her, arguing her son drove without consent.

The court found the mother had explicitly forbidden her son from driving her vehicle years prior, kept the keys in their usual place, and had no reason to suspect he would take the car while she was on vacation.

The court concluded the son did not have implied consent, dismissing the action against the mother and dismissing the insurer's motion.

This costs endorsement followed the dismissal of Edwin Allan's motion for a certificate of pending litigation (CPL).

Gordon and Joyce Allan, the successful responding parties to the CPL motion, sought $65,000 in substantial indemnity costs, citing formal and informal settlement offers.

Edwin Allan argued the quantum was excessive and payment should be deferred until trial, alleging the respondents inflated costs.

The court determined that Gordon and Joyce Allan were not entitled to substantial indemnity costs under Rule 49.10(2) as they were the responding parties.

The court fixed partial indemnity costs at $20,000, inclusive of disbursements and HST, to be paid by Edwin Allan within 60 days, finding the requested amount exorbitant given the motion's simplicity and the retention of senior counsel.

The plaintiff excavation contractor brought a construction lien claim against the defendant developer for unpaid contract work and extras.

The primary dispute was whether the plaintiff was entitled to charge extra for disposing of contaminated soil, which the defendant argued was included in the fixed contract price.

The court found that the defendant's agent had represented the soil as clean and that the parties had agreed to an extra charge of $47 per metric tonne for contaminated materials.

The court awarded the plaintiff $523,241.99 for the extras, finding the defendant liable for the increased disposal costs and other authorized scope changes.