Burtch v. Barnes (Estate)
Because success was divided, the court held that each side must bear its own costs of both the motion and the appeal and therefore made no order for costs in this court or before Keenan J.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2007 ONCA 95
- Parties
- Plaintiff/respondent: Vera Burtch; Plaintiff/respondent: Ken Burtch; Defendant: Estate of Kyle Barnes, deceased; Defendant: Martha Barnes; Defendant: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Ontario represented by the Minister of Transportation for the Province of Ontario; Defendant; Third Party/appellant: The District Municipality of Muskoka; Defendant: The Township of Muskoka Lakes
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 14 February 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Appeal From Superior Court of Justice (costs Endorsement)
- Outcome
- Each side to bear its own costs of the motion and the appeal; no order for costs in this court or before Keenan J.
- Legal Topics
- Costs Endorsement, Divided Success, No Costs Order
- 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
Vera Burtch
Plaintiff/respondent
Ken Burtch
Plaintiff/respondent
Estate of Kyle Barnes, deceased
Defendant
Martha Barnes
Defendant
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Ontario represented by the Minister of Transportation for the Province of Ontario
Defendant
The District Municipality of Muskoka
Defendant; Third Party/appellant
The Township of Muskoka Lakes
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Superior Court of Justice (costs Endorsement)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether costs should be awarded where success was divided
- 2 Whether costs should be ordered for both the motion and the appeal
- 3 Whether any order for costs should be made in this court or before Keenan J.
Ratio Decidendi
Because success was divided, the court held that each side must bear its own costs of both the motion and the appeal and therefore made no order for costs in this court or before Keenan J.
Court Disposition
Each side to bear its own costs of the motion and the appeal; no order for costs in this court or before Keenan J.
Orders
- Each side shall bear its own costs of both the motion and the appeal.
- No order for costs in this court or before Keenan J.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Burtch v. Barnes (Estate) Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2007-02-14 Neutral citation 2007 ONCA 95 Docket numbers C44270 Judges Laskin, John Ivan; Cronk, Eleanore Ann; Lang, Susan Elizabeth Subject Civil Decision Content CITATION: Burtch v. Barnes (Estate), 2007 ONCA 95 DATE: 20070214 DOCKET: C44270 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: VERA BURTCH and KEN BURTCH (Plaintiffs/Respondents) – and – THE ESTATE OF KYLE BARNES, DECEASED, MARTHA BARNES, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTER OF TRANSPORATION FOR THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO, THE DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA and THE TOWNSHIP OF MUSKOKA LAKES (Defendants) – and – THE DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY OF MUSKOKA (Third Party/Appellant) BEFORE: LASKIN, CRONK and LANG JJ.A. COUNSEL: Anne E. Spafford for the appellant, The District Municipality of Muskoka Roger G. Oatley and Brennan L. Kahler for the respondent HEARD & ENDORSED: February 2, 2007 On appeal from the order of Justice Harry J. Keenan of the Superior Court of Justice, dated September 16, 2005 made at Barrie, Ontario . COSTS ENDORSEMENT [1] Success was divided. Therefore, each side should bear its own costs of both the motion and the appeal. [2] We make no order for costs in this court or before Keenan J. “John Laskin J.A.” “E.A. Cronk J.A.” “S.E. Lang J.A.”