SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
COURT FILE NO.: 12266-11
DATE: 2014-12-23
RE: Cheryl Wright, Applicant
AND:
Gary Lavoie, Respondent
BEFORE: The Honourable Madam Justice Louise L. Gauthier
COUNSEL:
Applicant, Self-Represented
Respondent, Self-Represented
HEARD: Written Submissions
ENDORSEMENT
[1]
Entitlement to Costs
Family Law Rule 21(1) provides that a successful party is presumptively entitled to the costs of a case.
2Ms. Wright was successful in obtaining a spousal support order without a termination date. While I did impute some income to Ms. Wright for a fixed period, she clearly was successful on the issue of her entitlement to ongoing spousal support.
3I note, however, that Ms. Wright, late in the proceedings (at the commencement of the trial), withdrew her claim based on constructive trust.
4The overall objective, when dealing with the costs of a case, is to fix an amount that is fair and reasonable for the unsuccessful party to pay in the particular circumstances of the case; the task is to determine what is reasonable given the nature of the dispute, including the complexity of legal issues raised, the length of the proceeding, and the conduct of the parties.
[5]
Positions of the Parties
Ms. Wright seeks costs in the amount of $11,093.51, representing legal fees of her prior counsel up to August of 2014, and the costs of filing the Trial Record ($280).
6Ms. Wright began to represent herself in late summer 2014.
7Ms. Wright states that the costs she seeks relate to events and court appearances from May, 2013, when Mr. Lavoie ceased to comply with the temporary support order of December 12, 2011.
8Mr. Lavoie, for his part, also seeks costs, relying on what he describes as Ms. Wright’s vengeful, deceitful, and generally improper conduct during the proceedings.
9Mr. Lavoie raises, and I have considered, the fact of Ms. Wright’s very late withdrawal of her constructive trust claim.
10Both parties are and were self-represented at both the Trial Management Conference and the Trial itself. Both parties allege misconduct by the other, in the proceedings and otherwise.
[11]
Analysis
In the circumstances, and given that costs are to be dealt with (if they are going to be dealt with at all), in a summary way, promptly after each step in the case, (See Rule 24(10) of the Family Law Rules), and that a Trial Management Conference is logically tied to the conduct of the trial itself, I am not prepared to consider costs incurred prior to the Trial Management Conference.
[12]
Disposition
Having considered the submissions of both parties, and, considering that there were no “legal fees” incurred by either party for the Trial Management Conference and the Trial, the parties having represented themselves, I conclude that it would be fair and reasonable to compensate Ms. Wright for the cost of filing the Trial Record, and to allow her a modest amount for her time during the conference and the trial.
13Order to go that Mr. Lavoie pay to Ms. Wright, her costs of the trial, fixed in the amount of $2,000, inclusive of H.S.T.
The Honourable Madam Justice Louise L. Gauthier
Date: December 23, 2014