Amir-Afzal Watto v ICC, 2017 ONSC 7078
CITATION: Amir-Afzal Watto v ICC, 2017 ONSC 7078
COURT FILE NO.: CV-17-00583824
DATE: 20171128
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 253 OF THE CANADA NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION ACT, SC 2009, C. 23
AND IN THE MATTER OF RULES 14.05(2) AND 14.05(3) OF THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ELIGIBILITY OF MUHAMMAD AMIR-AFZAL WATTO TO BE NOMINATED FOR ELECTION AS A DIRECTOR OF THE IMMIGRANT CONSULTANTS OF CANADA REGULATORY COUNCIL
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
MUHAMMAD AMIR-AFZAL WATTO Applicant
– and –
IMMIGRATION CONSULTANTS OF CANADA REGULATORY COUNCIL Respondent
– and –
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO Intervenor
William Macintosh, for the Applicant
Natalie M. Leon, for the Respondent
HEARD: WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
COSTS ENDORSEMENT
DIAMOND J.
[1] At the conclusion of my Reasons for Decision released on October 30, 2017, I asked the parties to try and resolve the issue of the costs of this proceeding. They were unable to do so, and I have now received and reviewed the parties’ respective costs submissions pursuant to a fixed schedule.
[2] The respondent seeks costs of the application on a partial indemnity basis in the all-inclusive sum of $16,009.85.
[3] The application was prepared, served and argued on an urgent basis, and after the respondent delivered its responding materials and factum, the applicant then served a Notice of Constitutional Question upon, inter alia, the Attorney General for Ontario, which naturally lengthened both the preparation for and duration of the hearing itself.
[4] The applicant submits that the service and filing of his Notice of Constitutional Question was necessary as the respondent raised in its factum that the application had not been commenced in accordance with the provisions of the Limitation Act 2002 S.O. 2002 c.24. While I do agree with the applicant that the issue of whether or not the Limitations Act 2002 apply to the respondent as a federal not-for-profit corporation was not entirely settled in the jurisprudence, I do not agree that his application raised an issue of public interest involving the regulation of a public profession. As set out in paragraphs 16-21 and 25-29 of my Reasons, this application was the applicant’s latest attempt to seek redress for the respondent’s treatment of him since 2013.
[5] The application was dismissed. The respondent was thus wholly successful on the application, and there is no substantive reason why costs should not follow the event.
[6] As mandated by the Court of Appeal for Ontario in Boucher v. Public Accountants Council (Ontario) 2004 14579 (ONCA), I remain mindful of my obligation to consider what is “fair and reasonable” in fixing costs with a view to balancing compensation of the successful party with the overall goal of fostering access to justice.
[7] I have reviewed the respondent’s Costs Outline. The hours claimed therein are reasonable, especially given the fact that the applicant served a two volume application record on an urgent basis which required a quick turnaround in order to accommodate the applicant’s request to have the matter dealt with prior the respondent’s elections which were set to commence on November 6, 2017.
[8] Having regard to the results achieved, the reasonable expectations of the parties and the hours claimed, in the circumstances of this case, I order the applicant to pay the respondent’s costs of this application fixed on a partial indemnity basis in the all-inclusive amount of $13,500.00.
Diamond J.
Released: November 28, 2017
CITATION: Amir-Afzal Watto v ICC, 2017 ONSC 7078
COURT FILE NO.: CV-17-00583824
DATE: 20171128
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 253 OF THE CANADA NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION ACT, SC 2009, C. 23
AND IN THE MATTER OF RULES 14.05(2) AND 14.05(3) OF THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ELIGIBILITY OF MUHAMMAD AMIR-AFZAL WATTO TO BE NOMINATED FOR ELECTION AS A DIRECTOR OF THE IMMIGRANT CONSULTANTS OF CANADA REGULATORY COUNCIL
BETWEEN:
MUHAMMAD AMIR-AFZAL WATTO Applicant
– and –
IMMIGRATION CONSULTANTS OF CANADA REGULATORY COUNSIL Respondent
- and –
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO Intervenor
COSTS ENDORSEMENT
Diamond J.
Released: November 28, 2017