COURT FILE NO.: CV-07-329615 PD2
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
PAUL TIAGO and ANITA TIAGO
Plaintiffs
and
TINIMINT HOUSING NON-PROFIT INC., THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEEL, SAMUEL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LTD., MARTA MUNOZ, BRUCE LAIRD, IAN LATIMER and SPEIGEL NICHOLS FOX LLP
Defendants
BEFORE: Justice Edward Belobaba
COUNSEL: Aaron Hershtal for Defendants Ian Latimer and Speigel Nichols Fox LLP
Sean McGarry for Defendants Tinimint Housing Non Profit Inc., Marta Munoz and Bruce Laird
Theresa Hartley for Defendant Samuel Property Management
Christian Caffarena and Evan Kopiak for the Defendant Regional Municipality of Peel
No one attending for Responding Parties/Plaintiffs although duly served
HEARD: March 17, 2021 via Zoom video
COST AWARDS
1In a decision released on March 30, 2021 I dismissed the plaintiffs’ motion to reinstate long-dismissed actions and granted Peel Region’s motion for summary judgment, a matter that should have been heard seven years ago. I also granted the defendants’ application for a declaration that the plaintiffs are vexatious litigants.1
2I said this in my reasons about the potential cost awards:
I asked for costs submissions from the defendants on a partial indemnity basis and I have now received the following. The Latimer Defendants seek costs in the amount of $22,172.12. The Tinimint Defendants ask for $11,098.01. Samuel Property seeks $9,422.51 and Peel Region $43,139.79 ($8,265.73 for its summary judgment motion and $34,874.06 for the action.) These costs requests are separate from the costs that have already been considered and awarded. Before I decide the appropriate cost awards, I would welcome a responding submission from the plaintiffs within 14 days.2
3It has now been three weeks since the plaintiffs have been invited to forward responding cost submissions. Nothing has been received. This is not surprising. Over the course of the 15 years of spurious litigation, the plaintiffs have ignored literally dozens of adverse cost awards. The unpaid total now stands at $218,751.13. Whatever is awarded today will simply increase this amount – and again, will likely remain unpaid.
4Nonetheless, the defendants are entitled to their costs for the motions and application litigated herein. Given the vexatious dimensions of the plaintiffs’ conduct before this court over the years in question, it is arguable that the scale should be elevated to substantial indemnity. However, I am content with counsels’ acquiescence to use the partial indemnity measure.
5In my view, the amounts requested by each of the defendant groups (on a partial indemnity basis) as set out above are fair and reasonable to both the successful and unsuccessful parties.
6I therefore fix the costs payable to the Latimer Defendants at $22,172.12; to the Tinimint Defendants at $11,098.01; to Samuel Property at $9,422.51; and to Peel Region at $43,139.79 ($8,265.73 for its summary judgment motion and $34,874.06 for the costs of the action.) The overall total of $85,832.43 to be paid within 30 days by the plaintiffs, Paul and Anita Tiago, to the defendants as indicated.
7Order to go accordingly.
8I thank all counsel again for their assistance in this difficult matter.
Signed: Justice Edward P. Belobaba
Notwithstanding Rule 59.05, this Judgment [Order] is effective from the date it is made, and is enforceable without any need for entry and filing. In accordance with Rules 77.07(6) and 1.04, no formal Judgment [Order] need be entered and filed unless an appeal or a motion for leave to appeal is brought to an appellate court. Any party to this Judgment [Order] may nonetheless submit a formal Judgment [Order] for original signing, entry and filing when the Court returns to regular operations.
Date: April 20, 2021
Footnotes
- Tiago v. Tinimint Housing et al, 2021 ONSC 2232.
- Ibid. at para. 73.