Hogg v. Registrar of the College of Paramedics of Nova Scotia

Hogg v. Registrar of the College of Paramedics of Nova Scotia Court Supreme Court Date 2025-02-19 Citation 2025 NSSC 66 Docket HFX No. 535157 Judge/Registrar/Adjudicator Smith, Ann E. (Honourable Justice) Document Type Decision Decision Content SUPREME COURT OF Nova Scotia Citation: Hogg v. Registrar of the College of Paramedics of Nova Scotia, 2025 NSSC 66 Date: 20250219 Docket: HFX No. 535157 Registry: Halifax Between: Sybil Hogg Applicant v. The Registrar of the College of Paramedics of Nova Scotia Respondent DECISION ON COSTS Judge: The Honourable Justice Ann E. Smith Written Submissions: December 11 & 12, 2024 Counsel: Sybil Hogg, Self Represented Applicant Ryan Baxter, for the Respondent By the Court: Background [1] On October 31, 2024 this Court rendered two oral decisions involving the parties. [2] Both were motions brought by the Registrar of the College of Paramedics of Nova Scotia (the “Registrar”). against Ms. Hogg. [3] In the first motion, the Registrar sought an order dismissing a notice for judicial review, filed by Ms. Hogg on July 19, 2024, of what Ms. Hogg said was a decision of the Registrar. The Court allowed the motion, dismissed Ms. Hogg’s motion for judicial review and awarded costs in favour of the Registrar. [4] In the second motion, the Registrar sought a declaration from the Court that Ms. Hogg was a vexatious litigant. The Court so found and issued an order prohibiting Ms. Hogg from initiating new proceedings related to her application for registration and licensure with the College of Paramedics of Nova Scotia or the Nova Scotia Regulator of Paramedicine without Court approval to do so, with costs payable to the Registrar. [5] The parties were unable to agree on costs. The Court received written submissions from each of Ms. Hogg and the Registrar setting forth their position on costs. The Position of the Registrar [6] As the successful party on both motions, the Registrar seeks lump sum costs in the amount of $6,000.00. This is based upon an application of Tariff C of the Civil Procedure Rules. The Registrar says that given that these two motions were heard in more than a half day, but less than a full day, the range of applicable costs is between $1,000 and $2,000. Since the Registrar’s motion was determinative of the entirety of Ms. Hogg’s motion for judicial review and given the importance of the matter to the Registrar and the amount of effort in preparing for the motion, a multiplier of 3 should be applied to the maximum range of applicable costs, resulting in a costs award of $6,000. The Position of Ms. Hogg [7] Ms. Hogg submits that paying costs in the amount of $6,000 would be a hardship for her. She says that a costs award of $280 would be fair and appropriate in the circumstances. Ms. Hogg’s reaches that amount based upon a calculation of 70% of the costs awarded against her by the Honourable Justice Denise Boudreau in Hogg v. Registration Appeal Committee and College of Paramedics of Nova Scotia, S.H. No. 529637 on February 22, 2024. Ms. Hogg suggests that this approach to costs generally follows the approach of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal which she says is to award costs to a successful appellant in the range of 70% of the costs awarded by the court below. Ms. Hogg says that this approach reflects the reduced level of work required in cases involving duplicative arguments or issues. Analysis and Decision on Costs [8] The starting point in determining the quantum of costs is the Tariff of Costs and Fees under Rule 77. Costs on a motion are governed by Tariff C unless the judge orders otherwise. The Court may make any costs order that it determines will do justice between the parties (Rule 77.02(1)). [9] The hearing of the Registrar’s motions took more than a half-day, but less than a full day. As such, Tariff C costs fall in the range of $1,000.00 to $2,000.00. [10] As noted above, this Court granted the Registrar’s motion to dismiss Ms. Hogg’s motion for judicial review which she filed on July 19, 2024. The Court also granted the Registrar’s motion to declare Ms. Hogg to be a vexatious litigant in certain respects. Accordingly, paragraph 4(c) of Tariff C is triggered by the Registrar’s successful motion to have the July 19, 2024 motion for judicial review dismissed. Paragraph 4 (c) provides: (4) When an order following an application in Chambers is determinative of the entire matter at issue in the proceeding, the Judge presiding in Chambers may multiply the maximum amounts in the range of costs set out in this Tariff C by 2, 3 or 4 times, depending on the following factors: (a) the complexity of the matter, (b) the importance of the matter to the parties, (c) the amount of effort involved in preparing for and conducting the application. (such applications might include, but are not limited to, successful applications for Summary Judgment, judicial review of an inferior tribunal, statutory appeals and applications for some of the prerogative writs such as certiorari or a permanent injunction). [11] This Courts sets the Tariff C basic amount at $1,500.00. The matter was important to Ms. Hogg as it was to the Registrar. The Registrar expended considerable effort in bringing these two successful motions to the Court, submitting lengthy briefs and affidavits. The motions were clearly important to the Registrar given his role as a registration and decision maker with the College and Regulator. [12] The fact that the Registrar was tasked with responding to the same, or similar issues which were before Justice D. Boudreau does not mean that Ms. Hogg should receive a benefit in costs, as she suggests. In fact, the opposite is the case. The Court finds that the Registrar was put in a position of having to respond once again to many arguments and issues which were determined by Justice Boudreau. Costs can and should act as a deterrent to a party from re-litigating issues already decided by a Court. [13] I exercise my discretion to apply a multiplier of 2 to the amount of $1,500.00 resulting in costs of $3,000.00. These costs are payable within 90 calendar days of the date the order is issued. Conclusion [14] Ms. Hogg shall pay costs in the lump sum amount of $3,000.00 to the Registrar, through his legal counsel, within 90 calendar days of the date of the issued costs order in this matter. I ask counsel for the Registrar to prepare the form of the order for review and signature of Ms. Hogg, as to form only. Smith, J.