Focus Graphite Inc. v. Douglas, 2015 ONSC 1674
COURT FILE NO.: 13-57438
DATE: 2015/03/16
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
FOCUS GRAPHITE INC. and GARY ECONOMO
Plaintiffs
– and –
TED J. DOUGLAS also known as OGOPOGO007 also known as Drill_Deep,_Find_oil,_stay_calm
Defendant
Charles Gibson, for the Plaintiffs
No one appearing for the Defendant
HEARD: By written submissions
COSTS DECISION
Beaudoin J.
[1] In my Reasons for Judgment dated February 20, 2015, I awarded the Plaintiffs general and aggravated damages in the total amount of $65,000 for the Defendant’s defamatory statements.
[2] The Plaintiffs now seek costs on a substantial indemnity basis in the amount of $80,724.36. I have considered the following factors set out in rule 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194; namely:
(a) the principal of indemnity,
(b) the amount of costs that an unsuccessful party could reasonably expect to pay,
(c) the amount claimed and the amount recovered,
(d) the complexity of the proceedings,
(e) the importance of the issues,
(f) the conduct of the Defendant.
[3] This was a short uncontested trial that involved no examinations for discovery and no contested interlocutory proceedings.
[4] The damage awards were significantly lower than the amounts claimed. The Defendant’s conduct was taken into consideration in the award of aggravated damages.
[5] Although this was an uncontested trial, Plaintiffs’ counsel was not prepared to make submissions at the close of trial and requested additional time to submit lengthy written submissions.
[6] A great deal of time was spent with the Plaintiffs’ expert evidence and I found that I give it very little weight.
[7] I have examined the Bill of Costs. The amount of time claimed is excessive. A junior associate logged over 230 hours and nearly $40,000 in fees. Time dockets were not provided.
[8] The amount of costs has to be proportionate to the amount recovered, especially in a case that proceeded by default. In this case, the Plaintiffs seek an award of costs that is greater than the amount that they obtained in damages.
[9] In my view, an appropriate award of costs is $25,000 for fees. I do not allow any amount for the Report prepared by GSN DreamWorks Inc. The $1,231.95 disbursement to Westlaw is not explained. If this is for online research, I would expect that this would be mostly covered by a monthly subscription fee. Taxable disbursements are allowed at $4,500. Non-taxable disbursements are allowed in the amounts claimed. HST is to be added to the fees and the taxable disbursements.
[10] The Defendant is therefore ordered to pay the Plaintiffs’ costs in the all-inclusive amount of $34,288 within 30 days.
Mr. Justice Robert N. Beaudoin
Released: March 16, 2015
CITATION: Focus Graphite Inc. v. Douglas, 2015 ONSC 1674
COURT FILE NO.: 13-57438
DATE: 2015/03/16
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
FOCUS GRAPHITE INC. and GARY ECONOMO
Plaintiffs
– and –
TED J. DOUGLAS also known as OGOPOGO007 also known as Drill_Deep,_Find_oil,_stay_calm
Defendant
COSTS DECISION
Beaudoin J.
Released: March 16, 2015