Court File and Parties
BARRIE COURT FILE NO.: CV-13-0599-SR DATE: 20190709 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
RONALD ALBERT ORNSBY Plaintiff – and – ROBERT A. MONTEITH Defendant
Counsel: W. Michael Adams, for the Plaintiff Robert A. Monteith, Self-Represented
HEARD: In Writing
REASONS FOR DECISION ON COSTS
DiTOMASO J.
BACKGROUND
[1] This matter proceeded to trial for one day on May 14, 2019.
[2] The Plaintiff was successful in obtaining Judgment for the full amount of his claim, being $65,000 plus pre-judgment interest in the amount of $5,275.
[3] The case was a focused one. The Plaintiff and Defendant testified at trial.
[4] The parties agreed that costs would be determined by written submissions. While the Plaintiff delivered written submissions, the Defendant did not. Even after the Defendant was reminded to provide written submissions, he did not do so.
[5] Accordingly, costs are determined in this matter on the basis of written submissions provided by the Plaintiff.
Position of the Plaintiff
[6] The Plaintiff claims fees on a partial indemnity basis up to March 25, 2018 and on a substantial indemnity basis thereafter until the date of receiving Judgment in this case, for a total of fees, including HST in the amount of $12,608.54 and disbursements in the amount of $1,172.68, including HST, for a total in the amount of $13,781.22.
[7] The Plaintiff relies on the principles of assessing costs as set out in r. 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, and further detailed in the Plaintiff’s Costs Outline.
ANALYSIS
Entitlement
[8] The award of costs is discretionary. (See s. 131 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.C.43) In determining costs, the court may also consider those factors set out in r. 57.01.
[9] I have reviewed my Reasons for Judgment released May 30, 2019. I have reviewed all of the written submissions delivered by counsel for the Plaintiff, including the draft Bill of Costs, Costs Outline, Costs Submissions and Offer to Settle, dated March 13, 2018.
[10] I find the Plaintiff was the successful party and costs follow the event.
[11] I find that the Plaintiff’s r. 49 Offer does attract costs consequences pursuant to r. 49.
[12] I find that the Plaintiff is entitled to fees on a partial indemnity basis to March 25, 2018 and substantial indemnity costs thereafter.
Quantum
[13] The Plaintiff’s counsel presented Costs Submissions, a draft Bill of Costs and Costs Outline on behalf of the Plaintiff as directed.
[14] I have no difficulty with the time claimed by Plaintiff’s counsel and clerk. Further, I have no difficulty in respect of the hourly rates charged on behalf of counsel in the amount of $260 per hour at the partial indemnity rate and $385 per hour at the substantial indemnity rate. Neither do I have any difficulty with the amount charged for the clerk’s time, namely $70 per hour at the partial indemnity rate and $105 per hour at the substantial indemnity rate.
[15] I have reviewed the draft Bill of Costs and Costs Outline and am satisfied in respect of the fees and disbursements charged.
[16] I have also considered the r. 57.01(1) factors. This proceeding was not complex. The case was fairly straight-forward in respect of the issue, namely, the payment of $65,000, being the balance of monies owed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff upon the purchase of the Plaintiff’s banquet hall business by the Defendant.
[17] I would therefore award fees, inclusive of HST, in the amount of $12,608.54 and disbursements, inclusive of HST, in the amount of $1,172.68, for a total of $13,781.22 to the Plaintiff, payable by the Defendant.
[18] I find these costs to be fair, reasonable and proportional. (See Davies v. Clarington (Municipality), 2009 ONCA 722 at paras. 51 and 52)
DISPOSITION
[19] I hereby order that Robert A. Monteith pay the sum of $13,781.22, inclusive of fees, disbursements and HST, to Ronald Albert Ornsby for costs.
Mr. Justice G.P. DiTomaso