S. Jackson

The defendants moved for leave to amend their statement of defence and add a counterclaim for patent infringement against the plaintiff and several proposed defendants by counterclaim.

The plaintiff and proposed defendants opposed the amendments, arguing they were statute-barred and legally untenable.

The court granted leave to amend the defence and add the counterclaim against most of the proposed defendants, finding the amendments were not clearly statute-barred and met the low evidentiary threshold.

However, the court dismissed the motion to add one proposed defendant, Crystal, as the proposed pleading failed to allege any infringing activity within Canada.

In supplementary reasons addressing costs following earlier reasons under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, the applicant mortgage lender sought full indemnity costs based on contractual mortgage provisions.

The court confirmed that while contractual entitlement to full indemnity costs exists, the court retains supervisory authority to ensure the amounts claimed are fair and reasonable.

The applicant’s bill of costs was reduced for inefficiencies, including excessive research time and the use of senior counsel for work that could have been delegated or billed at a lower rate.

Additional reductions were made for excessive preparation time on reply materials.

The court ultimately fixed reasonable full indemnity costs and rejected arguments for further reductions based on partial success or for awarding costs to another resisting respondent.