ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
COURT FILE NO.: CV-10-399375
DATE: 20121221
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
KAZYS JUZUMAS Plaintiff – and – GALINA BARON Defendant
Rita Chrolavicius and Krystyne Rusek, for the Plaintiff
David Mario Farmani, for the Defendant
HEARD: October 29, 30, November 1, 2, 5, 16 and December 12, 2012
COURT FILE NO.: CV-10-399376
DATE: 20121221
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
CHARLES JUZUMAS Plaintiff – and – YEVGENI BARON Defendant
Rita Chrolavicius and Krystyne Rusek, for the Plaintiff
David Mario Farmani, for the Defendant
HEARD: October 29, 30, November 1, 2, 5, 16 and December 12, 2012
COURT FILE NO.: FS-11-374286
DATE: 20121221
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
GALINA BARON Plaintiff – and – KAZYS (CHARLES) JUZUMAS Defendant
David Mario Farmani, for the Plaintiff
Rita Chrolavicius and Krystyne Rusek, for the Defendant
HEARD: October 29, 30, November 1, 2, 5, 16 and December 12, 2012
LANG J.A. ( ad hoc )
COSTS ENDORSEMENT
[ 1 ] I released my reasons in the above actions today and heard further submissions on costs. This is my disposition of that issue.
[ 2 ] Kazys is the successful party; he is entitled to costs.
[ 3 ] In my view, it was not unreasonable for him to proceed with the annulment to trial, given its connection and similar foundation to his claim to set aside the transfer for misconduct on Galina’s part. His decision not to pursue an annulment, even late in the proceedings, simplified and limited the issues to be decided, including the issues that needed to be resolved in reasons for judgment. Galina also withdrew her claim for spousal support, which was doomed to failure, at least on the facts as I have found them.
[ 4 ] Counsel point out that the case involved three actions claiming in the vicinity of $650,000, representing virtually all of Kazys’ life savings. The facts were complex. Even though the law was not at issue, legal research was necessary regarding the multiple issues.
[ 5 ] Kazys had two counsel at trial. While those counsel agree that one set of costs should be awarded, each presented a bills of costs. The first, Ms. Rusek, represented Kazys for much of the initial litigation and court appearances. She seeks $68,342, including disbursements of approximately $2,300, on a substantial indemnity basis. The second, Ms. Chrolavicius, who is a lawyer with the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly, seeks $92,018 in costs on a partial indemnity basis. In my view, it was appropriate to have both counsel at trial and in preparation for trial for many reasons, including because of the language and other barriers faced by Kazys in accessing the justice system.
[ 6 ] I do not take exception with counsel’s hourly rates, both of which are in the $200 range. While some exception might be taken to the amount of hours spent on the file, in my view any undue length of time is tempered by the reasonable hourly rates of counsel. In addition, the docketed time needed to prepare these actions reflected a combination of factors, including difficulties caused by the Barons’ failure to produce or admit relevant documents, even at and during the trial, as well as their general non-responsiveness throughout the proceedings, particularly at the times they were self-represented. That said, I want to make the observation that their counsel at trial, Mr. Farmani, tried valiantly to ensure the Barons made disclosure even at that late date. It was not an easy task.
[ 7 ] In fixing costs in this matter, I consider the required factors, including proportionality and reasonableness. I also consider the procedural course of the actions, the offers filed, and the earlier (minimal) awards of costs.
[ 8 ] In light of all the circumstances, I exercise my discretion to award costs to Kazys Juzumas’ counsel in the amount of $80,000, inclusive of disbursements and applicable taxes representing their costs in all three proceedings.
[ 9 ] In the event the Barons are no longer represented by counsel, their approval as to the form and content of the judgment is hereby dispensed with.
LANG J.A. ( AD HOC )
Released: December 21, 2012
COURT FILE NO.: CV-10-399375
DATE: 20121221
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
KAZYS JUZUMAS Plaintiff – and – GALINA BARON Defendant
COURT FILE NO.: CV-10-399376
DATE: 20121221
BETWEEN:
CHARLES JUZUMAS Plaintiff – and – YEVGENI BARON Defendant
COURT FILE NO.: FS-11-374286
DATE: 20121221
BETWEEN:
GALINA BARON Plaintiff - and - KAZYS (CHARLES) JUZUMAS Defendant
COSTS ENDORSEMENT __________________________________________________
LANG J.A. ( AD HOC )
December 21, 2012