ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
COURT FILE NO.: FC-12-2099
DATE: 2014-03-12
BETWEEN:
B.B.
Applicant
– and –
T.W.
Respondent
Self - represented,
Christopher Deeble, for the Respondent
HEARD: In writing
Costs Reasons
T.D.RAY, J
[1] This case occupied three days of trial, following which I made orders concerning section 7 claims, equalization of NFP, Spousal Support, Child Support, Arrears of Spousal and Child support, division of Aeroplan points, matrimonial home sale proceeds, and medical-dental claims.(2014 ONSC 772). At the conclusion of my written reasons I invited costs submissions. I received binders from both parties which included their respective submissions in a #9 font, single spaced and with no margins in order to comply with my ‘two page’ request.
[2] In their submissions, both parties allege that they were reasonable while the other party was not. Both parties submit that they had bettered my orders in their offers. Both parties allege improper conduct on the part of the other in the conduct of the litigation. The respondent seeks full indemnity costs of $23,311.06, which he incorrectly describes as substantial indemnity costs. The applicant seeks full indemnity costs of $47,856.35, of which $45,140.85 were bills from her previous solicitor.
[3] I am making no order as to costs. Neither party presented the case in a very coherent fashion. Considering the numbers of conferences the parties attended, It is surprising that they could not resolve the issues on consent. However this may be one of those cases that needed a decision. The costs submissions suggest the bitterness between the parties has not abated. Having reviewed the various correspondence and settlement offers, while each party may have been on the mark on a particular issue, I am satisfied that neither party can point to overall success. In fact the tone of both of their submissions suggests that the result from my order was not a complete success.
[4] In addition, I am very aware that both parties have limited resources, and that a costs order against them would seriously affect the funds they use for the children. I am satisfied that in this case a ‘no costs’ order is the most appropriate order.
Honourable Justice Timothy Ray
Released: March 12, 2014
COURT FILE NO.: FC-12-2099
DATE: 2014-03-12
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
B.B.
Applicant
– and –
T.W.
Respondent
costs REASONS
Honourable Justice Timothy Ray
Released: March 12, 2014