Samuel Joseph Bachand

This endorsement addresses the issue of costs following a successful motion by the defendant to dismiss the plaintiff's action for lack of jurisdiction.

The defendant, as the successful party, sought costs.

The plaintiff opposed, arguing bad faith due to a forum selection clause.

The court applied Rule 57.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, considering factors such as complexity, importance, and reasonable expectations.

The court found partial indemnity costs appropriate and ordered the plaintiff to pay $8,000 to the defendant, inclusive of disbursements and HST.

The defendant brought a motion to dismiss or stay the action, arguing that the Ontario court lacked jurisdiction or that Quebec was the more appropriate forum under the doctrine of *forum non conveniens*.

The plaintiff contended that Ontario had jurisdiction based on a forum selection clause in its invoices.

The court found that Ontario had presumptive jurisdiction due to the forum selection clause, which the defendant failed to rebut.

However, upon a *forum non conveniens* analysis, the court determined that Quebec was clearly the more appropriate forum, considering factors such as where the contract was negotiated, the defendant's location, the project's location, and the residence of most witnesses.

The Ontario action was permanently stayed.