-
Recent Posts
Archives
- October 2015
- July 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- May 2014
- January 2014
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- November 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- September 2011
- May 2011
- February 2011
- October 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- November 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- November 2008
- October 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
Categories
- Advertising Injury
- Allocation of Defence Costs
- Appeals
- Auto
- Auto (Tort)
- CGL
- Collateral Benefits
- Commercial Litigation
- Conflict of Laws
- Contract
- Costs
- Damages
- Defamation
- Discoverability
- Discovery
- Duty to Defend
- Environmental
- Evidence
- Exclusions
- Experts and Opinions
- Fire Insurance
- Fires
- FLA
- Insurance News
- Juries
- Lawyers
- Limitation Periods
- Litigation Technology
- Municipalities
- Occupier's Liability
- Pleadings
- Practice and Procedure
- Practice of Law
- Privacy
- Privilege
- Products Liability
- Professional Liability
- Risk Transfer
- Sale of Goods
- Social and Commercial Host Liability
- Subrogation
- Threshold
- Tort News
- Trial Procedure
- Uncategorized
- Uninsured or Underinsured
- Waivers and releases
Meta
Category Archives: Costs
“Minimal Financial Risk” to Law Firm in Prosecuting AB Claim in Catastrophic Case, So Substantial Fee Premium Not Appropriate
In Adler v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Company, Madam Justice Nancy Spies dealt with an application by the law firm of Aylesworth LLP for court approval of lawyer-client fees and disbursements, to be paid out of the proceeds of the settlement … Continue reading
Posted in Auto, Costs, Insurance News, Lawyers
Comments Off on “Minimal Financial Risk” to Law Firm in Prosecuting AB Claim in Catastrophic Case, So Substantial Fee Premium Not Appropriate
When It Comes to “Reasonableness” in Costs, Look Around to See Where You Are
This post relates to a decision that dates back to last December. We only recently became aware of it. Unfortunately, the case does not appear on CanLII, so we are unable to provide a link to the reasons. However, a … Continue reading
Posted in Costs
Comments Off on When It Comes to “Reasonableness” in Costs, Look Around to See Where You Are
Can Defendants Ever Make Effective Rule 49 Offers in MVA Cases?
We are indebted to Mark (“Billy Idol”) Charron of Williams McEnery for alerting us to the recent decision in Peterson v. Phillips. This is another case that deals with the relationship between offers to settle in MVA claims and the … Continue reading
Posted in Auto, Costs, Insurance News, Threshold
Comments Off on Can Defendants Ever Make Effective Rule 49 Offers in MVA Cases?
Court Says Successful Threshold Defence Not to be Taken Into Account for Purposes of Costs
In Dennie v. Hamilton, the defendants’ solicitor probably thought that the trial had gone pretty well (see our previous post about this case). In this MVA action, the plaintiff had claimed damages of about $1 million. At the end … Continue reading
Posted in Costs, Insurance News
Comments Off on Court Says Successful Threshold Defence Not to be Taken Into Account for Purposes of Costs
C.A. Upholds Record Personal Injury Damages Award
Sandhu v. Wellington Place Apartments was one of the largest personal injury damages awards in Canadian history. The Court of Appeal recently dismissed an appeal from the trial decision (other than disallowing most of a $350,000 costs premium). The award … Continue reading
Court Ignores Past Collateral Benefits in Evaluating Rule 49 Offer
Bad news for insurers. In Ksiazek v. Newport Leasing Limited, Mr. Justice C. Raymond Harris extended the application of the Court of Appeal’s decision in Rider v. Dydyk and ruled that a defendant’s offer to settle should be compared with … Continue reading
Posted in Auto, Costs, Insurance News, Trial Procedure
Comments Off on Court Ignores Past Collateral Benefits in Evaluating Rule 49 Offer
Thunder Bay Judges Don’t Want to See Pyramids
There’s something afoot among the judges in Thunder Bay. Madam Justice Helen Pierce and Mr. Justice George Smith, colleagues on the Superior Court in that city, have both released rulings in which they have complained about what they call “pyramid billing”. This … Continue reading
Posted in Costs, Insurance News
Comments Off on Thunder Bay Judges Don’t Want to See Pyramids
Court Declines to Award Substantial Indemnity Costs Where Successful Defendant Had Offered Dismissal Without Costs
In Crete v. Carleton Condominium Corporation #47, Madam Justice Giovanna Toscano Roccamo delivered very comprehensive costs reasons following a trial by jury in which the plaintiff’s action had been dismissed. The decision is instructive with respect to several aspects of … Continue reading
Posted in Costs, Practice and Procedure
Comments Off on Court Declines to Award Substantial Indemnity Costs Where Successful Defendant Had Offered Dismissal Without Costs
C.A. Says “No” to Risk Premiums in Costs
The Court of Appeal today released its decision in Ward v. The Manufacturers’ Life Insurance Company. We are familiar with this case because local lawyers Eric R. Williams and Jaye E. Hooper, who acted for the plaintiff Ward, won at trial … Continue reading
Posted in Commercial Litigation, Costs, Insurance News
Comments Off on C.A. Says “No” to Risk Premiums in Costs
Costs of $177,950 for Occupier’s Liability Damages Award of $177,373
In Singer v. Hamilton, Mr. Justice William J. Festereyga had to assess costs following the 15-day trial of an occupier’s liability case. He had assessed damages and interest at $177,373.55. His decision reaffirms that even awards of substantial indemnity costs … Continue reading
Posted in Costs
Comments Off on Costs of $177,950 for Occupier’s Liability Damages Award of $177,373