T. B. v. H.M.Q., 2024 ONSC 1252

Court File and Parties

Court File No.: CV-18-455-00 and CV-18-457-00 Date: 2024-02-29 Superior Court of Justice – Ontario

Between: F.M., T.F. -M., “S.M.”, a minor under the age of 18 years, by his Litigation Guardian F.M., Plaintiffs And: His Majesty the King in right of Ontario (“HMK”), OPP, Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board, Principal Kelly Barton, Officer Christina Sanghera, and Officer Gillian Sinclair, Defendants

Between: “D.B.”, “B.B.”, “T.B.”, a minor under the age of 18 years, by his litigation Guardian “B.B.”, Plaintiffs And: His Majesty the King in right of Ontario (“HMK”), OPP, Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board, Principal Kelly Barton, Officer Christina Sanghera, and Officer Gillian Sinclair, Defendants

Before: Bloom, J.

Counsel: Daniel Mayer and Kristina Yeretsian, for the Moving Parties, the Defendants, His Majesty the King in right of Ontario, Christina Sanghera, and Gillian Sinclair J. Bogle and M. Singh, for the Responding Parties, the Plaintiffs

COSTS ENDORSEMENT

1This is my ruling on costs in relation to the motions for summary judgment regarding which I delivered my endorsement on the merits dated December 18, 2023.

2The Moving Parties argue that they ought to receive a costs award in each proceeding of $70,000.00 all inclusive on a partial indemnity basis.

3They argue that this award is justified based on their success; and that this award is fair, reasonable, and falls within the expectations of the parties.

4They also argue that this award is supported by their offer to settle after discovery, namely a dismissal without costs.

5They submit further that the amount sought is not unreasonable, given the serious allegations which had been made against them.

6The Plaintiffs submit that no costs ought to be awarded to the Moving Parties for two reasons. First, the motion materials served and file by the Moving Parties did not provide notice relating to the claims of conspiracy and intentional infliction of mental harm.

7Second, an award of costs would impede the Plaintiffs’ pursuit of the proceedings against the remaining Defendants.

8I am satisfied that the costs sought by the Moving Parties are appropriate, and I order that in each proceeding the Plaintiffs pay all inclusive costs of $70,000 to the Moving Parties on a partial indemnity basis within 90 days. The liability of the Plaintiffs to the Moving Parties for the costs is joint and several. The total costs amount is $140,000. I shall now explain my reasons for this order.

9First, the Moving Parties were entirely successful.

10Second, their offer to settle was a generous one in light of the result.

11Third, the allegations in the claims against the Moving Parties were serious.

12Fourth, the amount of costs sought in each proceeding was reasonable and fair, particularly having regard to the costs sought by the Plaintiffs before the motions which exceeded $50,000 on a partial indemnity basis in each proceeding.

13Fifth, the factums of the Moving Parties disclosed their positions on the torts of conspiracy and intentional infliction of mental harm before the hearing of the motions. The Defendants were not taken by surprise, therefore, by those positions.

14Last, I am not persuaded that the costs I am awarding should be reduced because the Plaintiffs are continuing the proceedings against the remaining Defendants.

Bloom, J.