Citation and Court Information

CITATION: 2441472 Ontario Inc. v. Collicutt Energy Services Corp., 2016 ONSC 2278

BARRIE COURT FILE NO.: 15-0727

DATE: 20160404

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

2441472 ONTARIO INC. Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim

– and –

COLLICUTT ENERGY SERVICES CORP. Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim

COUNSEL:

K.W. McKenzie, for the Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim

H.D. Krupat and B. Clancy, for the Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim

HEARD: By way of written submissions

REASONS FOR DECISION ON COSTS

R. MacKINNON J.:

[1] In my Reasons for Decisions on Motions of January 22, 2016, I found that success was evenly divided on the five motions which counsel argued before me. I allowed counsel to make submissions on any settlement offers potentially impacting the awarding, but not the quantum, of costs. I have now received and fully considered their written material.

[2] Collicutt argues it had greater success on the motions than did the plaintiff. Not only do I disagree, I have already held otherwise. Nothing in Collicutt’s Costs Submissions persuades me to the contrary. The motion success resulting from each party’s legal efforts was evenly divided.

[3] Both parties made what I consider to be good faith attempts to resolve the outstanding issues in these five motions. None were Rule 49 offers to settle, but rather, were exchanges between counsel that involved potential settlement scenarios. Nothing in the voluminous costs materials filed by Collicutt, or in the Costs Submissions of the plaintiff persuades me to make an order of costs in either party’s favour on any of these motions.

[4] I remind counsel of the contents of paragraph 24 of my January 14 Reasons. No order as to costs.

R. MacKINNON J.

Released: April 4, 2016