Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: FS-20-25 (Milton) DATE: 2021 08 09

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

Alan Haaksma Applicant

-and-

Elise Charlotte Anne Taylor Respondent

Counsel: Alan Haaksma, acting in person Ursula Cebulak, for Ms. Taylor

Heard: In writing

Before: Chown J.

ENDORSEMENT Re COSTS and Further Hearing

[1] Despite paragraph 50 of my July 7, 2021 endorsement, Mr. Haaksma wrote my assistant to question why I did not wait for a report from the Children’s Lawyer before releasing the endorsement. I directed my assistant to reply that I would not be responding.

[2] Ms. Cebulak’s office wrote the day before the filing deadline for her application, to ask if it was intended by my endorsement that personal service of her application is required. The email did not come to my attention before the filing deadline, but I would not have responded other than to say I would not be substantively responding.

[3] I received Ms. Taylor’s costs submissions and Mr. Haaksma’s advice by email that he had no responding submissions on costs, but that he would be appealing my order and bringing a motion for a stay.

[4] By letter dated August 6, 2021, Ms. Cebulak has asked for a hearing pursuant to paragraph 50 of my July 7, 2021 endorsement. She advises that Mr. Haaksma agreed to a proposed real estate agent but will not agree to proceed with the sale. She has received a notice of appeal but advises that my order has not been stayed, so I infer no notice of motion for a stay has been delivered.

Costs of Motion

[5] Ms. Taylor was fully successful in the motion. She claims full costs of $4,886.69. She says she should receive full costs because most of the relief requested in her notice of motion could have been avoided by Ms. Haaksma if he had just complied with court orders.

[6] Ms. Taylor’s bill of costs is reasonable and proportionate and in line with what a losing litigant should expect to pay in a motion of this nature. The time spent by Ms. Cebulak and her clerk appears appropriate and justified.

[7] I fix the costs of motion at $4,000, which is above partial indemnity rates but less than full costs. Mr. Haaksma failed to follow court orders. He failed to deliver his application which resulted in an inability to advance this matter. However, I am not awarding full costs or substantial indemnity costs because I consider that an extraordinary order which is not quite justified by the circumstances.

[8] Mr. Haaksma shall, within 30 days, pay Ms. Taylor the costs of this motion which are fixed in the amount of $4,000 all inclusive.

Further Hearing

[9] Based on the information received, Mr. Haaksma is appealing my ruling and will be bringing a motion for a stay of my order. My order stands but, provided that the appeal and stay process is moved forward expeditiously, it is appropriate to allow that process to advance before arranging a further hearing before me.

[10] I ask Ms. Cebulak to wait at least two weeks and then email me again (through my judicial assistant) to advise me whether a date for the stay motion before the Court of Appeal has been set, and whether Ms. Taylor still requires a hearing to deal with any issues regarding the sale. I ask that Ms. Cebulak also advise whether she wants the hearing in writing or orally and, if orally, to provide dates for her availability. I will be able to accommodate a timely hearing date for a 9:00AM hearing. Mr. Haaksma may then write, within one week of receiving Ms. Cebulak’s email, to advise me of his position on whether a hearing is required, whether it should be in writing or oral, and his availability for a 9:00AM hearing.

“Justice R. Chown”

Released: August 9, 2021