The appellant law firm sought leave to appeal a cost order made against it personally under Rule 57.07.
The firm had been removed as counsel for the plaintiff due to a conflict of interest, as another lawyer in the firm was acting for the defendant hospital.
The motion judge found the firm failed to fully disclose the conflict to the plaintiff and maintained an untenable position, causing unnecessary costs.
The Divisional Court denied leave to appeal, finding no conflicting decisions and no reason to doubt the correctness of the motion judge's order.
