Court File and Parties

Court File No.: FS-17-8787-M1(Owen Sound) Date: 2022-01-14 Superior Court of Justice - Ontario

Re: Glenda Anne McInnes, Applicant And: Matthew Christian Fritz, Respondent

Before: Justice J.R. Sproat

Counsel: S. Arnold, for the Applicant R. Shankar, for the Respondent

Costs Endorsement

Overview

[1] I have reviewed the written costs submissions.

[2] Mr. Fritz was successful in obtaining a temporary order increasing his parenting time so that the parties have equal parenting time.

[3] Mr. Fritz made an offer to settle dated November 15, 2021 proposing equal parenting time. Ms. McInnes made two offers to settle which were both premised on unequal parenting time with most of Mr. Fritz’s parenting time being on the weekend.

[4] Mr. Shankar seeks what he refers to as “substantial indemnity” costs of $3,440.85. Mr. Shankar indicates full indemnity costs would be $4,915.50. Virtually all of the time was spent by Mr. Shankar, who docketed approximately 16 hours, at an actual hourly rate of $250.

[5] Ms. McInnes submits that there should be no costs payable or, in the alternative, that any costs payable by her be offset against what she claims are child support arrears, with any shortfall to be paid within 60 days of the child support issue being determined.

Analysis

[6] I do not agree that substantial indemnity costs are appropriate. My order of equal parenting time was conditioned on Ms. McInnes assuming responsibility for health care decisions. As such, the result was not equal to or better than the offer by Mr. Fritz.

[7] The time spent by Mr. Shankar and the hourly rate are both reasonable. I would typically regard substantial indemnity costs as approximately 90% of full indemnity, and partial indemnity costs at approximately 60% of full indemnity. Mr. Shankar’s request for “substantial indemnity” costs was, however, approximately 70% of full indemnity.

[8] I award Mr. Fritz costs of $3,400, being approximately 70% of his actual costs. This is a somewhat higher percentage than I might ordinarily award for costs, however, I do so because Mr. Fritz made reasonable offers and, if Ms. McInnes had agreed to equal parenting time, the motion might well have settled.

[9] Ms. McInnes’ alternative argument is that payment of costs be deferred pending determination of child support arrears. She indicates that Mr. Fritz has paid child support of $250 per month, based on his prior income of $41,165. Mr. Fritz’s line 150 income for 2020 was $51,299 and Ms. McInnes suggests that he now earns closer to $60,000 per year.

[10] While I am not deciding whether Ms. McInnes has an entitlement to additional child support, I will order that Ms. McInnes shall pay the costs I have awarded on the earlier of:

a) 30 days following a court order determining whether she is entitled to additional child support; and

b) June 30, 2022.

SPROAT J.

Date: January 14, 2022