Court File and Parties

Court File No.: LS017/10
Date: 20120221
Superior Court of Justice – Ontario

Re: THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA , Applicant

AND:
DAVID GRANT ISAAC , Respondent

Before: Stinson J.

Counsel:
Margaret Cowtan , for the Applicant
David Grant Isaac, self-represented

Heard: By written submissions

Endorsement as to Costs

[ 1 ] In my decision released December 21, 2011, I dismissed Mr. Isaac's cross-motion in its entirety.

[ 2 ] The Law Society seeks costs of the cross-motion in the amount of $3,118.30. Mr. Isaac asserts that no costs should be awarded to the Law Society and that he should be awarded costs due to alleged misconduct by the Law Society. He further asserts impropriety on the part of Law Society counsel for appearing on behalf of the Law Society in violation of s. 49.53 of the Law Society Act , R.S.O. 1990, c. L.8.

[ 3 ] Dealing with the last point first, Mr. Isaac's reliance on s. 49.53 is misplaced. That provision applies only to proceedings in which the subject of the proceeding is a Bencher or employee of Law Society. As such, it has no bearing on the present case.

[ 4 ] The remainder of Mr. Isaac's response to the claim for costs is comprised of complaints regarding the manner in which the Law Society obtained and carried out the trusteeship order. In essence, they are largely a repetition of Mr. Isaac's arguments on his cross-motion before me. Once again, they are not supported by any evidence.

[ 5 ] In my decision dated December 21, 2011, I addressed Mr. Isaac's complaints, insofar as the record before me allowed me to do so. I found against his submissions and I do not propose to repeat what I said then. I incorporate by reference my disposition of those same arguments.

[ 6 ] It follows that I see no basis for Mr. Isaac's allegations of impropriety by the Law Society. It further follows that I see no basis for awarding costs to Mr. Isaac, nor for depriving the Law Society, as the successful party, of an award of partial indemnity costs in its favour.

[ 7 ] As to the quantum, the Law Society was wholly successful and the matter is of some importance. The motion challenged the underlying basis for the trusteeship order. I would, however, disallow the claim for attendance on the hearing of the motion of a second ungowned counsel for the Law Society. In my view, the presence of that individual was unnecessary and as a result that is not a cost that can be claimed. The balance of the costs claimed by the Law Society are reasonable and would have been within the expectation of an unsuccessful moving party.

[ 8 ] I therefore award costs of $2,618.30 payable by Mr. Isaac to the Law Society within 30 days.

Stinson J.

Date: February 21, 2012