Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: FS-15-83434-00 DATE: 2018 12 11

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

RE: PAULINA BRIGHT KUDOM, Applicant AND: PATRICK KUDOM-INNOCENT, Respondent

BEFORE: Justice Irving André

COUNSEL: O. Owusu, for the Applicant J. Stanleigh, for the Respondent

COSTS ENDORSEMENT

[1] Following a six-day trial concerning the nature of the parties’ relationship, custody, spousal support, child support and, equalization of net family property, the applicant, who was substantially successful, seeks costs in the amount of $20,000.

BACKGROUND

[2] Ms. Paulina Bright Kudom and Mr. Patrick Kudom-Innocent lived together for approximately twenty-seven years before going their separate ways. Ms. Kudom testified that the two were involved in a customary marriage in Ghana in 1986. They subsequently moved to Egypt and then to Canada before finally settling in Brampton. They had three children during their time together.

[3] During the trial, Mr. Kudom-Innocent denied having had any type of romantic relationship with Ms. Kudom despite the following: the parties had three children, Mr. Kudom-Innocent identified Ms. Kudom as his spouse when he applied for her to move to Canada, he identified her as his spouse when he applied for a loan in 1991 to purchase his Brampton home and the fact that Ms. Kudom had remained at home, at his request, to care for their children. At the end of the trial, I found that the parties had indeed gotten married in Ghana, and had lived as a couple before the relationship ended and that because Ms. Kudom had been disadvantaged as a result of the marriage, I ruled that she was entitled to spousal and also child support from Mr. Kudom-Innocent. I also ordered that the matrimonial home should be sold and that the net family property of both parties should be equalized.

ANALYSIS

[4] In deciding what amount of costs is fair and reasonable in this case, I am guided by Rule 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, s. 131 of the Courts of Justice Act R.S.O. 1990, c.C. 43, and the applicable jurisprudence. Specifically, I am guided by the following factors:

(1) Ms. Kudom was substantially successful in the trial;

(2) The issues involved, particularly those relating to whether the parties were married, were relatively complex;

(3) The case involved a great deal of preparation and required the applicant to obtain affidavit evidence from Ghana in support of her position;

(4) The case took six days to complete;

(5) Mr. Kudom-Innocent’s denial that the parties had a relationship was unreasonable in light of the evidence called at trial and;

(6) Counsel for the applicant, Mr. Owusu, has considerable experience in family law and his hourly rate is reasonable.

[5] In my view, the costs claimed by Ms. Kudom are not unreasonable. However, she was not fully successful in the trial given that a) she did not get the quantum of spousal support claimed, b) the court did not accept the valuation of the property she owned in Ghana and c) I imputed an income to Mr. Kudom-Innocent that was considerably less than that proposed by Ms. Kudom.

[6] For the above reasons, costs in the amount of $18,000 inclusive are fair and reasonable in this case.

ORDER

[7] Order to go that Mr. Kudom-Innocent pays costs fixed in the amount of $18,000, inclusive, to Ms. Paulina Bright Kudom, within ninety (90) days of the date of this endorsement.

André J.

Date: December 11, 2018