Court File and Parties
COURT FILE NO.: CV-20-4322 DATE: 20220331
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Redstone v. Candelaria Pictures and Neves
BEFORE: Van Melle J.
COUNSEL: J. Anisman, (janisman@btlegal.ca) for the Plaintiffs A. Dhanda (astha@orcuslaw.com) for Candelaria Pictures M. Neves (manny@hardcorerenos.com) in person
HEARD: March 30, 2022
E N D O R S E M E N T
[1] Mr. Neves scheduled a motion for today asking that he be removed from the action as a defendant in his personal capacity. The plaintiffs resisted the motion and asked for a timetable to be imposed.
[2] From the outset there were significant issues with Mr. Neves’ motion materials. Ms. Dhanda, for the co-defendant prepared the materials while she was still acting for Mr. Neves. At some point after the preparation and service of the motion record she realized that there were deficiencies. She prepared an amended motion record and served it on February 23, 2022. Mr. Neves terminated her retainer in connection with him personally and the amended motion record was never filed with the court.
[3] The motion was scheduled for 59 minutes but it was readily apparent that it would take longer than that and as such a long motion date would be required.
[4] After some discussion regarding the merits of the motion, Mr. Neves wisely decided to abandon his motion and instead to direct his efforts to getting matter on for trial.
[5] The parties were able to agree to a timetable which timetable I endorse and forms part of my order.
[6] Plaintiffs’ counsel, Mr. Anisman, was put to the expense of defending Mr. Neves’ motion. Mr. Neves has costs of $1,000 still outstanding from Justice Ricchetti’s order of September 14, 2021, relating to an abandoned request for particulars. Mr. Neves stated today that he was unaware of that order until earlier this year. If that is true, he has still had 3 months to pay the costs and he has not done so.
[7] Mr. Anisman submits that he had to prepare for this motion as a partial summary judgment motion. Ms. Nanda on behalf of Mr. Neves today, says that he did not have to do so and could have put less time toward preparation. In my view to do so would have been dangerous and it was reasonable in the circumstances for Mr. Anisman to prepare for the motion as he did.
[8] Mr. Anisman’s seeks costs on a substantial indemnity basis. I agree that Mr. Neves’ behaviour warrants costs on a substantial indemnity scale. Ms. Dhanda submits that as Mr. Neves is self represented I should reduce the costs to as low an amount as possible, payable after trial. Rule 57 expressly directs a court to take into consideration the fact that one party brings motions that are improper or unnecessary. It is well-established that proceeding without a lawyer does not protect a litigant from an order for costs.
[9] Mr. Anisman seeks substantial indemnity costs of $16,126.16. While the time spent on this matter is on the high side, I note that more work was necessitated by the non-responsiveness of Nr. Neves and by the work in preparing a proper motion record and factum. I therefore award costs in that amount to the plaintiffs payable within 30 days.
[10] An order will issue imposing the timetable attached hereto and awarding costs in favour of the plaintiffs as set out above.
Van Melle J. DATE: March 31, 2022
Timetable
Court File No.: 20-00004322-0000 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N:
REX REDSTONE and REBECCA REDSTONE Plaintiffs
- and -
CANDELARIA PICTURES CORPORATION C.O.B. AS HARDCORE RENOS and MANUEL NEVES Defendants
A N D B E T W E E N:
CANDELARIA PICTURES CORPORATION c.o.b. as HARDCORE RENOS Plaintiff by Counterclaim
- and -
TERENCE GORENDER and REBECCA REDSTONE Defendants to the Counterclaim
The parties shall exchange sworn Affidavit of Documents and Schedule “A” productions in electronic “.pdf” format on or before April 29, 2022
The parties shall attend for examination for discovery on or before June 10, 2022
The parties shall provide answers to undertakings, questions taken under advisement, and refusals within 45 days from the conclusion of their respective examination for discovery
If the parties choose to mediate this dispute, it shall occur within 90 days from conclusion of the examinations for discovery
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE Proceeding Commenced at Brampton
Brauti Thorning LLP 161 Bay Street, Suite 2900 Toronto ON M5J 2S1 Justin W. Anisman LSO No. 65790T janisman@btlegal.ca Tel: 416.362.4567 Fax: 416.362.8410 Lawyers for the plaintiffs, Rex Redstone and Rebecca Redstone RCP-E 4C (May 1, 2016)