Surewerx USA Inc. v. Dentec Safety Specialists Inc.

Surewerx USA Inc. v. Dentec Safety Specialists Inc.

The Court awarded costs to the Plaintiffs in a lump sum of $3,680 because the default mid-Column III tariff was appropriate but an upward adjustment was justified by the broader professional significance of clarifying the Model Protective Order; the Court declined to treat Surewerx's refusal of Dentec's settlement offer as legally significant and took into account that Surewerx had already received a $7,000 costs award on the underlying motion.

Citation
2022 FC 1315
Parties
Plaintiffs/defendants by Counterclaim: Surewerx USA Inc.; Plaintiffs/defendants by Counterclaim: Jet Equipment & Tools Ltd.; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim: Dentec Safety Specialists Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal of Case Management Judge Order and Subsequent Costs Determination / Costs Determination Following Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Costs awarded to the Plaintiffs; lump sum of $3,680 payable by the Defendant
Legal Topics
Model Protective Order Interpretation, Solicitor's Eyes Only Designation, Costs Awards, Settlement Offers and Costs Consequences
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Confidentiality and Protective Orders Costs Law Practice and Procedure Model Protective Order Interpretation Solicitor's Eyes Only Designation Costs Awards Settlement Offers and Costs Consequences

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Surewerx USA Inc.

Plaintiffs/defendants by Counterclaim

Jet Equipment & Tools Ltd.

Plaintiffs/defendants by Counterclaim

Dentec Safety Specialists Inc.

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Appeal of Case Management Judge Order and Subsequent Costs Determination / Costs Determination Following Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the identity of the manufacturer designated as Solicitor's Eyes Only under the Model Protective Order was properly challengeable
  2. 2 Proper interpretation and test for challenging SEO designations under the Federal Court Model Protective Order
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded following dismissal of the appeal and if so, quantum and factors justifying deviation from default tariff

Ratio Decidendi

The Court awarded costs to the Plaintiffs in a lump sum of $3,680 because the default mid-Column III tariff was appropriate but an upward adjustment was justified by the broader professional significance of clarifying the Model Protective Order; the Court declined to treat Surewerx's refusal of Dentec's settlement offer as legally significant and took into account that Surewerx had already received a $7,000 costs award on the underlying motion.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the Plaintiffs; lump sum of $3,680 payable by the Defendant

Orders

  • Costs are payable by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs in the lump sum amount of $3,680.00