Following a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claim against landlord defendants, the court considered the issue of costs.
The plaintiffs had alleged that the defendants owed a statutory duty as landlords related to liquor licence liability insurance, but failed to identify supporting legislation and proceeded despite a settlement offer to dismiss the action without costs.
The court found the plaintiffs continued litigation despite the weakness of their position and the high likelihood of dismissal.
While expressing sympathy for the injuries alleged, the court held the moving parties were entitled to costs.
Costs were fixed at $10,000 plus disbursements.
