2 total
Appeal dismissed on contract interpretation but trial costs reduced after finding counsel did not improperly influence expert.
The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) appealed a trial judgment finding it liable for the failure of a road surface treatment applied by the respondent contractors.
The trial judge concluded the contract was a method specification contract, placing the risk of failure on the MTO, and heavily criticized MTO's counsel for allegedly improperly influencing its expert witness, awarding full indemnity costs.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's interpretation of the contract but found he erred in his severe criticism of MTO's trial counsel, noting that counsel's interactions with the expert were appropriate under the principles in Moore v. Getahun.
Consequently, the Court reduced the trial costs award from full to substantial indemnity.
Appeal from assessment of solicitor-client accounts dismissed; fees exceeding initial estimate found reasonable.
The appellant, a lawyer, retained the respondent law firm to assist her at a trial.
The respondent's initial estimate of costs was $50,000, but the final accounts exceeded $150,000.
The assessment officer found the accounts reasonable, noting the work was done at the appellant's behest, and the Superior Court dismissed the appellant's appeal.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the further appeal, finding no error in principle in the assessment officer's conclusion that the accounts were reasonable given the circumstances.
