ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
COURT FILE NO.: 11-CV-432919CP
DATE: 20140715
BETWEEN:
BOB BRIGAITIS and CINDY RUPERT
Plaintiffs
– and –
IQT, LTD., c.o.b. as IQT SOLUTIONS, IQT SOLUTIONS, IQT CANADA, LTD., JDA PARTNERS LLC, IQT, INC., ALEX MORTMAN, DAVID MORTMAN, JOHN FELLOWS, RENAE MARSHALL, and BRAD RICHARDS
Defendants
Theodore P. Charney, for the Plaintiffs
Jodi Gallagher Healy, for the Defendants IQT, Inc., IQT Canada, Ltd., JDA Partners LLC, David Mortman and Alex Mortman
Proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992
HEARD: In Writing
Perell, J.
REASONS FOR DECISION - COSTS
[1] This is an action certified as a class proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, c. C.6. The Representative Plaintiffs, Bob Brigaitis and Cindy Rupert, brought a motion to obtain details of how the Defendants’ insurer had expended the insurance proceeds that might be available to cover the Plaintiffs’ claim. The Plaintiffs lost the motion. See Brigaitis v. IQT, Ltd. (IQT Solutions), 2014 ONSC 3619. The successful Defendants now seek partial indemnity costs of $6,557.95, all inclusive.
[2] The Plaintiffs submit that because success was divided on the motion, there should be no order as to costs. They submit that success was divided because in the run up to the motion, the Defendants disclosed the amount of insurance available, which was a valuable bit of information that it is alleged that the Defendants had resisted providing.
[3] The Defendants dispute that they resisted providing the amount of insurance available, but in my opinion whether they did or didn’t does not lead to the result that the motion was a divided success.
[4] The Plaintiffs pressed on for what I characterized as an overreaching demand and they failed. The Defendants are the successful party and they are entitled to costs in the normal course.
[5] The Plaintiffs submit that the amount claimed for costs by the Defendants is excessive and unreasonable and especially so by comparison to the expenditure of time by the Plaintiffs.
[6] I need not decide whether or not the Defendants’ commitment of resources was excessive, because in my opinion having regard to the nature of the interlocutory motion and the various other factors that guide the discretion of the court in awarding costs, the amount claimed is beyond what the unsuccessful party could reasonably expect to pay in relation to the motion.
[7] Accordingly, I award the Defendants costs of $4,500, all inclusive, payable within 30 days.
Perell, J.
Released: July 15, 2014
COURT FILE NO.: 11-CV-432919CP
DATE: 20140715
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
BOB BRIGAITIS and CINDY RUPERT
Plaintiffs
‑ and ‑
IQT, LTD., c.o.b. as IQT SOLUTIONS, IQT SOLUTIONS, IQT CANADA, LTD., JDA PARTNERS LLC, IQT, INC., ALEX MORTMAN, DAVID MORTMAN, JOHN FELLOWS, RENAE MARSHALL, and BRAD RICHARDS
Defendants
REASONS FOR DECISION - COSTS
Perell, J.
Released: July 15, 2014