Court File and Parties

Court File No.: CV-19-118 Date: 20190514 Ontario Superior Court of Justice

Between: Navin Joshi, Applicant – and – Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario, Respondent

Counsel: Navin Joshi, for himself Thomas Lipton, for the respondent

Read: May 10, 2019 Before: F.L. Myers J.

Reasons for Decision on Costs

This Proceeding

[1] By endorsement dated April 18, 2019, reported at 2019 ONSC 2444, the court dismissed this proceeding under Rule 2.1.

[2] The respondent seeks costs on a partial indemnity basis of $2,310 all-inclusive. The applicant did not deliver responding submissions.

[3] Rule 2.1 proceedings are often decided without costs. Here however, Mr. Joshi is on at least his fourth piece of litigation (that I know of) to obtain the same basic relief. He has had at least two prior lawsuits dismissed under Rule 2.1. Moreover the Court of Appeal struck an appeal under Rule 2.1 from a judge’s Rule 2.1 dismissal order.

[4] I view this proceeding therefore as vexatious – brought to vex the respondent. It cannot have been brought with a reasonable expectation that it could possibly succeed. Mr. Joshi knew or should have known that a Rule 2.1 dismissal was the likely outcome as it was previously. Yet he made the respondent incur costs and he utilized the scarce resources of the Attorney-General’s office and the court anyway.

[5] In 1465778 Ontario Inc. v. 1122077 Ontario Ltd., at para. 26, Feldman JA wrote,

…costs have more recently come to be recognized as an important tool in the hands of the court to influence the way the parties conduct themselves and to prevent abuse of the court's process.

[6] In my view, costs are appropriate in this case to try to bring home to Mr. Joshi that there are consequences to taking legal proceedings and forcing the respondents to incur costs frivolously or vexatiously. Moreover, it is reasonable for the successful party to receive partial indemnification for its costs under the normative approach in any event. Had the respondent asked, this may well have been a case for enhanced costs due to the applicant’s repeated abuse of the court’s processes.

[7] The amount sought is very reasonable. The rate proposed of $110 per hour is well below the available rate on the Costs Grid. The time involved includes all assessable time in the proceeding to date. While the preparation of a Rule 2.1 request takes little time, given the extensive history of Mr. Joshi’s repeated lawsuits against Her Majesty and others, it is reasonable for some time to have been taken to prepare to respond to the claim.

[8] The applicant shall pay the respondent forthwith costs fixed at $2,310.

F.L. Myers J. Released: May 14, 2019