ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

Court File No.: CV-08-089930-00
Date: 20120127

BETWEEN:

GIULIA FALBO AHMADI
Plaintiff

– and –

FERNBROOK HOMES (BLOCK 18 GULF) LIMITED
Defendant

Self Represented

B.D. Moldaver, for the Defendant

HEARD: By written submissions

McCARTHY J.

[1] I have now considered the submissions of the parties made in writing on the issue of costs (Jan 16 th and 25 th , 2012) by Mr. Moldaver for the defendant and by the Ms. Ahmadi, self represented plaintiff, on January 24 th , 2012.

[2] The defendant was entirely successful on the trial of this matter. It should be entitled to costs of the action throughout in light of the fact that the plaintiff failed to obtain any kind of a judgment in its favour. The defendants offer to settle dated November 3 rd , 2011 was clear and unequivocal and was not accepted by the plaintiff. It was only at the outset of trial that the plaintiff elected not to pursue a claim for pecuniary damages for not having enjoyed gas services beginning in 2008. In addition, she failed to advance any evidence in support of her claim for damages for mental and psychological suffering. Her claim for punitive and aggravated damages was entirely unfounded.

[3] There was not an abundance of documents for either party to review. The plaintiff elected not to exercise her rights of discovery against the defendant. The defendant conducted only a short discovery of the plaintiff. The plaintiff could not have proceeded under Simplified Procedure (Rule 76) in light of the injunctive relief that she was initially seeking. The trial of the action required only a day and a half. The defendant was required to cross examine only one witness in addition to the plaintiff. The matter was not in any way complex; the issues were of importance to the parties but cannot be said to have touched on novel or lofty issues of law.

[4] I am not satisfied that substantial indemnity costs for any part of the proceeding are warranted. The plaintiff did not lengthen unnecessarily the duration of the proceeding. The plaintiff could not reasonably expect to be exposed to the quantum of costs being sought by the defendant on a substantial indemnity basis. There must also be some proportionality between the amount claimed and the amount of costs. The amount of time spent on the preparation for this relatively straight forward matter appears to me to be slightly, although in no way grossly, excessive.

[5] The defendant shall be entitled to its costs of the action, including costs at trial and for submissions on costs on a partial indemnity scale fixed at $16,500 inclusive of disbursements and HST.

McCARTHY J.

Released: January 27, 2012