SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

COURT FILE NO.: CV-14-508442
DATE: 20150915

RE: Christopher Tinkasimire, Plaintiff/Moving Party

AND:

MTCC #597 & MTCC #628, Defendants/Responding Parties

BEFORE: R. F. Goldstein J.

APPEARANCE: Christopher Tinkasimire, Plaintiff/Moving Party, on his own behalf

Rovena Hajderi, for the Defendants/Responding Parties

COSTS ENDORSEMENT

[1] The Plaintiff unsuccessfully sought summary judgment from the Defendants. He was employed as a security guard and has brought an action that, in essence, alleges a constructive dismissal.

[2] After reviewing the material and hearing submissions, I found that a mini-trial was appropriate. That mini-trial will be directed to determining the implied terms of the employment contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.

[3] The guiding principle in matters of costs is that the court should set an amount that is fair and reasonable in the circumstances: Boucher v. Public Accountants Council for Ontario, 2004 14579 (Ont.C.A.), 71 O.R. (3d) 291, [2004] O.J. No. 2643 (C.A.).

[4] I originally indicated that I would simply amend the formal order that was taken out by the Defendants in order to provide for costs. After reviewing the order, however, I think it makes more sense to set out my reasons for the costs award in an endorsement format.

[5] Mr. Tinkasimire agreed that as the losing party he was responsible for costs. In a written submission to me, he indicated that he could pay about $2000.00. The Defendants filed a costs outline seeking $4,361.40 in costs on a partial indemnity basis. The real cost to the clients is over $6000.00.

[6] The legitimate expectation of the parties an important consideration in determining an appropriate costs award. There is nothing unreasonable about the amount asked for by Defendants. Indeed, it is lower than the amounts sometimes asked for by similar parties similarly situated. It is well within the legitimate expectation of any reasonable litigant. After reviewing the outline in detail, I order Mr. Tinkasimire to pay jointly to the defendants $4,000.00 in costs for the motion.

[7] The defendants may take out a further order and may dispense with Mr. Tinkasimire’s approval as to form and content.

R. F. Goldstein J.

Date: September 15, 2015