Robert V. Botsford

The applicant, Robert Buys, successfully applied for an assessment of 17 accounts rendered by the respondent law firm, Carrel + Partners LLP, totaling $63,378.84.

The law firm opposed the application.

Buys sought substantial indemnity costs, arguing the firm should have consented and delayed the process, and that his offer to settle was better than the outcome.

The court found that substantial indemnity costs were not warranted as the firm's conduct did not meet the threshold of "reprehensible, scandalous or outrageous." The court awarded partial indemnity costs, considering the applicant's success, the moderate complexity of the issues, the significance of the accounts, and the applicant's offer to settle (though not compliant with Rule 49.03).

The court reduced the claimed hours and disallowed certain disbursements, ultimately awarding $5,000 for fees plus HST, and $125 for photocopying and courier costs plus HST.

The applicant sought an order to assess the accounts of his former family law solicitor, totaling over $63,000.

The accounts had been paid, and the application was brought more than two years after the final account was delivered.

The court found that the initial order obtained by requisition was a nullity as it was outside the one-month time limit under s. 3(b) of the Solicitors Act.

However, the court exercised its discretion under ss. 4(1) and 11 of the Act, finding that 'special circumstances' existed to permit the assessment.

These circumstances included the applicant objecting to the accounts immediately after the retainer ended and the significant total amount of the bills for a relatively simple family law matter.

Following an application under the Partition Act for the sale of a jointly owned property, the parties resolved the substantive issues and sought a determination on costs.

The applicant sought costs from the date she first demanded a sale, arguing the respondent's initial failure to respond necessitated the litigation.

The court awarded the applicant $7,500 in costs for the period prior to the respondent retaining counsel, finding the respondent's intransigence caused unnecessary litigation.

For the period after the respondent retained counsel, the court ordered the parties to bear their own costs, save for $550 awarded to the respondent for reviewing real estate documents.