Sabrina Lucenti

The plaintiff brought a motion to set aside an administrative dismissal of her action against the Greater Sudbury Police Services Board and a former police sergeant.

The action was dismissed in 2018 due to delay, but the defendants had initially consented to setting it aside before withdrawing consent.

The court found that the plaintiff had a reasonable explanation for the delay, which was largely attributable to her former counsel's inadvertence and the defendants' own delays.

The court also found no significant actual prejudice to the defendants.

The motion to set aside the dismissal was granted.

The self-represented plaintiff commenced an action against the lawyers and a consultant acting for a corporation in which he is a minority shareholder, alleging negligence and enabling oppression.

The court initiated a Rule 2.1 review to determine if the claim was frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process.

The court found that while the plaintiff may eventually have a viable claim depending on the outcome of his main oppression action, the current claim against the corporation's professionals was premature and an abuse of process.

The action was dismissed without prejudice, with leave required to recommence after the main action concludes.

The defendants were successful on a motion to regularize the self-represented plaintiff's statement of claim.

The court awarded partial indemnity costs to the defendants, noting that the plaintiff's combative approach and refusal to accept constructive direction necessitated the motion and the participation of all defense counsel.

The responding party successfully defended a written motion and sought costs on a full or substantial indemnity basis.

The moving party argued for nominal costs due to the responding party's alleged disregard for court rules.

The court found no basis for full indemnity costs and noted that the responding party's verbal offer to settle did not comply with Rule 49.

Applying the principles of proportionality, fairness, and reasonableness, the court awarded the responding party partial indemnity costs of $10,500 inclusive of disbursements.