Canada Case Law

Kelly v Byrne

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Applying Rule 77 discretion and relevant case law, the Court determined the applicant was the more successful party on the principal issues, the matter involved significant non‑monetary complexity (parenting) and disclosure failures increased expense, the applicant incurred $37,386.33 in fees (including a $5,000 allowance for self‑representation), and a lump‑sum party‑and‑party award representing a substantial contribution (70% recovery = $23,291.48) was required to do justice; accordingly the respondent was ordered to pay $23,291.48 forthwith.

Source excerpt

• Imputation of income
• Retroactive child support (s.3, s.7)
• Spousal support (compensatory and non‑compensatory)
• Costs assessment (tariff a/c, lump sum/armoyan approach)
• Parenting orders and co‑parenting conflict
• Disclosure and financial disclosure

Read case analysis

Chao Yin Canada Group Inc. v. Xenova Property Development Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Master Keighley assessed special costs for Chao Yin Canada Group Inc. at $307,993.63 after a fraud trial and related bankruptcy proceedings, awarding full fees and disbursements.

• Special costs
• Assessment of legal fees
• Disbursements
• Quantum meruit
• Lifting stay in bankruptcy
• Special-costs

Read case analysis

Georgetown Rail Equipment Company v. Tetra Tech Eba Inc.

Court

Federal Court

Federal Court costs assessment awarding Tetra Tech most claimed costs and disbursements, while disallowing second counsel fees and counsel travel absent express direction.

• Costs assessment
• Tariff b column v
• Assessment officer jurisdiction
• Second counsel fees
• Travel disbursements
• Bifurcation

Read case analysis

MFSJ862 v. FFSJ862

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Costs assessment in a high-conflict family case. The registrar allowed the claimant’s legal fees in full, reduced some disbursements, and declined to assess costs not included in the filed bill.

• Special costs
• Disbursements
• Disclosure
• Expert evidence
• Jurisdiction to assess costs
• Conduct and litigation misconduct

Read case analysis

Clorox Company of Canada, Ltd. v. Chloretec S.E.C.

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court assessed costs in favor of Chloretec S.E.C., allowing $7,000.56 and rejecting several claimed items, including discovery, service fees, and taxes on counsel invoices.

• Assessment of costs
• Tariff b column iii units
• Allowable disbursements
• Photocopy charges
• Gst/qst on counsel fees
• Travel disbursements

Read case analysis

Christoforou v. John Grant Haulage Ltd.

Court

Federal Court

Federal Court costs assessment allowing the respondent’s bill in part, converting hours into Tariff B units and disallowing unsupported HST.

• Assessment of costs under tariff b
• Assessable services vs disbursements
• Conversion of hours to tariff units
• Allowance of hst/gst
• Second counsel rules
• Costs-assessment

Read case analysis

Strata Plan LMS 2154 v. 0752737 B.C. Ltd.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Registrar assessed recoverable strata-lien legal costs under s. 118 SPA, reducing several billed amounts for inefficiency and duplication and allowing $6,855.48.

• Strata lien
• Costs assessment
• S.118 strata property act
• Registration of lien
• Order for sale
• Strata-lien

Read case analysis

Northwest Organics, Limited Partnership and Northwest Group Properties Inc. v. Roest

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Registrar Nielsen assessed costs after a 23-day trial, apportioning tariff items between two jointly tried defamation actions and allowing some disbursements while rejecting others.

• Libel
• Slander
• Unlawful interference with economic interests
• Tariff items
• Apportionment of costs
• Disbursements

Read case analysis

Brown v. Williams

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Costs assessment after a motor vehicle settlement. The Master allowed reduced tariff units and several disbursements, disallowed others as overhead or unnecessary, and sanctioned a revised bill of costs.

• Tariff items
• Disbursements
• Expert witness fees
• Trial adjournment due to judicial shortage
• Notices to admit
• Costs-assessment

Read case analysis

Newell v. Sax

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Assessment Officer did not display a reasonable apprehension of bias and her factual findings unaffected by an erroneous curtailment ruling are owed deference; both the Assessment Officer and the application judge erred by applying an overly mechanical hourly calculation instead of a contextual quantum meruit analysis using the Cohen factors; appellate court substituted a fair and reasonable assessment of $100,000 inclusive based on the Assessment Officer's findings and the proper application of legal principles.

Source excerpt

• Quantum meruit
• Solicitor's account assessment
• Reasonable apprehension of bias
• Natural justice
• Deference to fact findings

Read case analysis