Plackova v. Turcott
- Citation
- 2001 BCSC 1691
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of British Columbia
- Decision
- 4 December 2001
- Posture
- Civil Litigation / Post Judgment (supplementary Reasons for Judgment on Costs)
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of British Columbia
- Decision
- 4 December 2001
- Posture
- Civil Litigation / Post Judgment (supplementary Reasons for Judgment on Costs)
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court exercised its authority to prevent prejudice by superseding paragraph 14 of the Supplementary Reasons for Judgment and ordering that the defendants' costs be set off against the plaintiff's total costs and the plaintiff's award; all other parts of the Supplementary Reasons were confirmed.
Court disposition
Paragraph 14 of the first Supplementary Reasons for Judgment is superseded and replaced; all other aspects of the Supplementary Reasons are confirmed.
Orders
- Paragraph 14 of the first Supplementary Reasons for Judgment is superseded by new paragraph 14.
- The costs of the defendants to be set-off against the total of the costs of the plaintiff and the award to the plaintiff.
- In all other respects the Supplementary Reasons for Judgment are confirmed.
02
Material facts
Parties
Slavomira Plackova
Plaintiff Counsel: Stuart J. LeinRebecca Ann Turcott
Defendant Counsel: Timothy H. PettitPatricia Ann Turcott
Defendant Counsel: Timothy H. PettitOldrich Prexler
Defendant Counsel: Timothy H. Pettit03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Litigation / Post Judgment (supplementary Reasons for Judgment on Costs)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the original costs order resulted in prejudice to the defendants
- 02
Whether paragraph 14 of the Supplementary Reasons should be amended to provide a set-off of defendants' costs against the plaintiff's total costs and award
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Plaintiff's counsel submitted that the original costs order could result in an injustice to the defendants and proposed that paragraph 14 be amended so that the costs of the defendants be set off against the plaintiff's total costs and the plaintiff's award.
- Respondent
- Defendants' position is not separately recorded in the reasons; court proceeded to amend the costs provision to avoid prejudice to the defendants.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Inherent jurisdiction of the court / practice of the Supreme Court
A court may amend or clarify its own orders to prevent prejudice and secure a just outcome
- 02
Practice and authorities on costs and disbursements
Costs between parties may be set off against each other as part of costs determinations
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court exercised its authority to prevent prejudice by superseding paragraph 14 of the Supplementary Reasons for Judgment and ordering that the defendants' costs be set off against the plaintiff's total costs and the plaintiff's award; all other parts of the Supplementary Reasons were confirmed.
Court disposition
Paragraph 14 of the first Supplementary Reasons for Judgment is superseded and replaced; all other aspects of the Supplementary Reasons are confirmed.
- Paragraph 14 of the first Supplementary Reasons for Judgment is superseded by new paragraph 14.
- The costs of the defendants to be set-off against the total of the costs of the plaintiff and the award to the plaintiff.
- In all other respects the Supplementary Reasons for Judgment are confirmed.
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of British Columbia · 4 December 2001
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Judgment· 4 December 2001
2001BCSC1691 Citation: Plackova v. Turcott Date: 20011204 2001 BCSC 1691 Docket: B992684 Registry: Vancouver
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN:
SLAVOMIRA PLACKOVA
PLAINTIFF AND:
REBECCA ANN TURCOTT
PATRICIA ANN TURCOTT
OLDRICH PREXLER
DEFENDANTS
SECOND SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE COULTAS Counsel for Plaintiff: Stuart J. Lein Counsel for Defendants: Timothy H. Pettit Place of Trial: Vancouver, B.C. [1] On August 23rd, 2001 I handed down Supplementary Reasons for Judgment which dealt with the issue of costs. I said, inter alia: There will be a set-off of costs and disbursements between the parties. [2] On October 26th I received a letter from counsel for the plaintiff submitting that my costs order may result in an injustice to the defendants, and suggesting that my costs order should read: The costs of the defendants to be set-off against the total of the costs of the plaintiff and the award to the plaintiff. [3] Upon receipt I wrote to Mr. Lein, counsel for the plaintiff, asking if he intended to respond to the October 25th letter and on November 7th he advised me that he did not intend to do so. [4] Given that my original costs order could result in prejudice to the defendants I order that paragraph 14 of the first Supplementary Reasons for Judgment be superseded by this new paragraph 14 which reads: The costs of the defendants to be set-off against the total of the costs of the plaintiff and the award to the plaintiff. [5] In all other respects I confirm my Supplementary Reasons for Judgment. "G.R.B. Coultas, J." The Honourable Mr. Justice G.R.B. Coultas
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.