Atlas Holdings & Investments Inc. v. Plewa

Atlas Holdings & Investments Inc. v. Plewa Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2009-11-23 Neutral citation 2009 ONCA 821 Docket numbers C50291, M38017 Judges Feldman, Kathryn N.; Cronk, Eleanore Ann; Gillese, Eileen E. Subject Civil Decision Content CITATION: Atlas Holdings & Investments Inc. v. Plewa, 2009 ONCA 821 DATE: 20091123 DOCKET: C50291 (M38017) COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Feldman, Cronk and Gillese JJ.A. BETWEEN Atlas Holdings & Investments Inc. and Atlas Maintenance Systems (A) Inc. Plaintiffs and George Vratsidas, Athanasia Vratsidas, Maria Vratsidas, Shawna Vratsidas, Constantinos Vratsidas, 1715034 Ontario Inc. carrying on business as First Maintenance Solutions, Kristopher Plewa, Roderick John Byrnes and Brian T. Chan Defendants AND BETWEEN Kristopher Plewa and 1715034 Ontario Inc. Plaintiff by counterclaim (Appellant on Appeal) and George Gianopoulos, Glenn Cohen, Atlas Holdings & Investments Inc., Atlas Maintenance Systems (A) Inc., and Chris Mantis Defendants to the counterclaim (Respondents on Appeal) David Martin, for the appellant Ranjan Das, for the respondents Heard: September 24, 2009 On appeal from the order of Justice G. B. Morawetz of the Superior Court of Justice dated March 12, 2009. ADDENDUM [1] Following our endorsement in this appeal, released on October 8, 2009, counsel for the parties wrote to this court concerning clarification of paragraph two of our endorsement and this court’s disposition regarding the costs of the proceedings below, including the costs of the motion for leave to appeal from the motion judge’s order. This addendum responds to that correspondence. [2] Paragraph two of our endorsement is directed at only those respondents who advanced claims against the appellant in the 2006 action. [3] Two issues concerning costs have arisen. First, as no materials on the issue were filed with this court, we did not address the costs of the proceedings below in our endorsement. We have now been informed that several parties not involved in this appeal participated in those proceedings, and therefore may be affected by any costs award. Accordingly, the issue of the appropriate resolution of the costs below is remitted to the motion judge for determination in light of our endorsement and this addendum. [4] Second, in our endorsement, we awarded no costs of the appeal. In our view, the same disposition is appropriate in respect of the two earlier motions in this court. Accordingly, we make no costs award concerning those motions. “K. Feldman J.A.” “E.A. Cronk J.A.” “E.E. Gillese J.A.”