ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT FILE NO.: CV-09-45078 / FC-09-904
DATE: 20120127

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

ROSALINE TRANG Plaintiff – and – HA T. Nguyen (also known as CAROLYN NGUYEN), and QUOC DUNG TRAN (also known as ALEXANDER TRAN) and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA (Canada Revenue Agency) Defendants SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE FAMILY COURT BRANCH BETWEEN: CAROLYN NGUYEN Applicant – and – ALEXANDER TRAN and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA (Canada Revenue Agency) Respondents

Michael S. Hebert, for the Plaintiff

Gregory A. Ste. Marie, for the Applicant Carolyn Nguyen Andrew Gibbs and Stephanie Lauriault for the Canada Revenue Agency

endorsement as to costs

c. mckinnon j.

[ 1 ] Further to my judgment in this case reported at [2011] O.J. No. 5546 , I am now in receipt of the submissions of the parties with respect to costs. All parties are agreed that costs should be payable on a partial indemnity basis. All parties are also agreed upon the quantum of costs. The quantum of costs agreed are $9,882.79 in favour of the plaintiff Rosaline Trang, $13,750.00 in favour of the applicant Carolyn Nguyen and $18,974.50 in favour of the respondent Canada Revenue Agency. All these amounts are inclusive of fees, disbursement and HST.

[ 2 ] The dispute between the successful plaintiff Rosaline Trang and the applicant Carolyn Nguyen and the unsuccessful respondent Canada Revenue Agency relates to whether the costs should be payable at this time or in the cause. The respondent Canada Revenue Agency submits that the costs should be payable in the cause. The parties have informed me that my judgment is under appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal.

[ 3 ] I am persuaded that costs should be payable now. The reason is that the matter before me was brought pursuant to Rule 21.01(1) (a) of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure seeking the determination of a question of law prior to trial. That proceeding was initiated by the respondent Canada Revenue Agency. Implicit in the application brought pursuant to Rule 21 is that the settlement of the question of law might dispose of the action. In my opinion the application before me constituted a separate and discrete proceeding, the success or failure of which should attract costs payable forthwith. There is no reason why costs should not follow the result in this proceeding. There is no assurance that a trial will occur. In the result, costs are payable in the amounts agreed to by the parties to the plaintiff Rosaline Trang and the applicant Carolyn Nguyen.

The Hon. Mr. Justice C. McKinnon.

Released: January 27, 2012

COURT FILE NO.: 10-49230
DATE: 20120127

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: ROSALINE TRANG Plaintiff – and – HA T. Nguyen (also known as CAROLYN NGUYEN), and QUOC DUNG TRAN (also known as ALEXANDER TRAN) and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA (Canada Revenue Agency) Defendants SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE FAMILY COURT BRANCH BETWEEN: CAROLYN NGUYEN Applicant – and – ALEXANDER TRAN and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA (Canada Revenue Agency) Respondents endorsement as to costs C. McKinnon J.

Released: January 27, 2012