Ontario v. Coote
The constitutional challenge to s.140 was rejected; the application judge properly applied s.140 and the quantum of costs was reasonable; courts may award costs against self-represented litigants where circumstances warrant it.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2011 ONCA 563
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario; Appellant: Antoine Coote aka Antoine Coote aka Claufield Anthony St. Orbin Coote; Respondent: Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 24 August 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Appeal (motion in Court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Motion dismissed; constitutional challenge and costs challenge rejected
- Legal Topics
- Section 140 Courts of Justice Act, Costs Against Self Represented Litigants, Constitutional Validity Challenge
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario
Respondent
Antoine Coote aka Antoine Coote aka Claufield Anthony St. Orbin Coote
Appellant
Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (motion in Court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether s. 140 of the Courts of Justice Act is constitutionally invalid or improperly applied
- 2 Whether the quantum of costs awarded by the application judge was unreasonable
- 3 Whether costs can be awarded against an in-person (self-represented) litigant in these circumstances
Ratio Decidendi
The constitutional challenge to s.140 was rejected; the application judge properly applied s.140 and the quantum of costs was reasonable; courts may award costs against self-represented litigants where circumstances warrant it.
Court Disposition
Motion dismissed; constitutional challenge and costs challenge rejected
Orders
- Motion dismissed
- Costs order of the application judge upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Ontario v. Coote Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2011-08-24 Neutral citation 2011 ONCA 563 Docket numbers C53319, M39964 Judges Sharpe, Robert J.; Armstrong, Robert Patrick; Karakatsanis, Andromache Rhea Subject Civil Decision Content CITATION: Ontario v. Coote, 2011 ONCA 563 DATE: 20110824 DOCKET: M39964 (C53319) COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Sharpe, Armstrong and Karakatsanis JJ.A. BETWEEN Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario Respondent and Antoine Coote aka Antoine Coote aka Claufield Anthony St. Orbin Coote Appellant and Lawyers’ Professional Indemnity Company Respondent and Antoine Coote aka Antoine Coote aka Claufield Anthony St. Orbin Coote Appellant Antoine Coote, in person Jeremy Glick and Zachary Green, for Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Ontario Raj Anand and Faren H. Bogach, for the Lawyers’ Professional Indemnity Company Heard: August 23, 2011 ENDORSEMENT [1] There is no merit to this motion, inter alia, questioning the constitutional validity or application of s. 140 of the Courts of Justice Act and the costs order of the application judge. The quantum of costs awarded was reasonable and there is no error in awarding costs against an in-person litigant in the circumstances of this matter.