Court File and Parties
CITATION: 1413910 Ontario Inc. v. McCarthy Tétrault LLP, 2015 ONSC 2631
COURT FILE NO.: CV-14-10504-00CL
DATE: 20150421
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO
COMMERCIAL LIST
RE: 1413910 Ontario Inc., Applicant
AND:
McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Respondent
BEFORE: Newbould J.
COUNSEL: William L. Roland, for the Applicant Lisa Jorgensen, for the Respondent
Endorsement
[1] I have now received cost submissions following my decision of February 24, 2015 regarding the assessment of the McCarthy Tétrault LLP accounts and in which I ordered costs to be paid by the applicant.
[2] McCarthy Tétrault requests costs of $14,800, including costs for Mr. Hall of $2,800 ($350 for 8 hours), costs for Ms. Jorgensen of $2,190 ($150 for 14.6 hours) and a disbursement of approximately $10,000 for the transcript of the hearing before the Assessment Officer. These costs are modest and below what often now are awarded. See Stetson Oil & Gas Ltd v. Stifel Nicolaus Canada Inc., 2013 ONSC 5213. I would have been prepared to award costs at a higher rate if asked.
[3] I decline to reduce the costs for statements in the factum about the hearing officer. The information was relevant. I also decline to reduce time for alleged duplication. It is nitpicking for what is a very modest bill.
[4] Regarding the transcript costs, it is argued that the transcript was not necessary and therefore no cost order should be made for the disbursement. I would not second guess Mr. Hall’s decision to order it. He contended on the motion that the Assessment Officer made findings of fact not supported by evidence, and putting in the transcript before me would not have been necessary unless it was said that there was some evidence.
[5] Taking into account the factors in rule 57.1 including what the applicant could reasonably expect to pay, I fix costs in the amount of $10,800 inclusive of disbursements and HST. These costs may be set off against the amount ordered to be repaid by McCarthy Tétrault to the applicant.
Newbould J.
Date: April 21, 2015