Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CV-19-00632915-00CP DATE: 20240514 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

SAMANTHA PRICE, SKYE MCLEOD, KENNETH PRICE, CLAIRE SMITH, PATRICK MCLEOD, AND JANE MCLEOD Plaintiffs

• and - SMITH & WESSON CORP. Defendant

Proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992

Counsel: Malcolm Ruby and Adam Bazak for the Plaintiffs Scott Maidment and Jennifer Dent for the Defendant Tina Yang for the Law Foundation of Ontario

HEARD: In writing

Reasons for Decision – Costs - Addendum

PERELL, J.

[1] After, I released my costs decision in this matter, Price v. Smith & Wesson Corp., 2024 ONSC 2606, my legal assistant received the following correspondence from counsel for the Plaintiffs and the Law Foundation of Ontario, which correspondence was copied to counsel for the Defendant:

On behalf of the Law Foundation and Plaintiffs’ counsel, we are respectfully requesting two changes to the Reasons for Decision released by Justice Perell on Friday, 3 May 2024.

First, we ask that the last sentence of paragraph 13 of the Decision be corrected to read: “On consent, the costs of this motion are to be in the cause of the certification motion.”

This is consistent with the published version of the Decision: Price v. Smith & Wesson Corp., 2021 ONSC 8471. It is also consistent with the attached email exchange with you and Justice Perell culminating in Justice Perell’s email dated 30 December 2021.

Second, the Partial Indemnity costs request made by Plaintiffs’ counsel was actually of $1,262,650.68, comprising $971,020.30 for fees, HST of $136,232.63, and disbursements of $165,397.85. The $1.8 million amount cited in the Decision was the Substantial Indemnity costs request. We are therefore requesting that the amount be changed in paragraphs 17, 49, and 50 of the Decision. A copy of Plaintiffs’ Costs Summary, which is found at Schedule “C”, Tab 1, pages 26-27 of the Joint Responding Costs Brief of the Law Foundation and Plaintiff’s counsel is attached.

We asked Mr. Maidment for his consent to this request but he declined. We invite him to respond with any objections he may have.

[2] My original decision may be read with this information about the Plaintiffs’ expenditure of legal costs for the Certification Motion and the interlocutory motions.

[3] This information does not change the exercise of my discretion about costs.

Perell, J.

Released: May 14, 2024.