IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Chater et al v. Canada Lands Company, 2005 NSSC 120 Date: 20050518 Docket: S.H. 204478 Registry: Halifax Between: Eli Chater and Almon Investment Plaintiffs/Respondents v. Canada Lands Company CLC Limited Defendant/Applicant Judge: The Honourable Justice Walter R.E. Goodfellow Heard: February 15, 2005, in Halifax, Nova Scotia (Chambers) Final Written Submissions: May 9, 2005 Counsel: Gary A. Richard, for the Plaintiffs/Respondents Peter M.S. Bryson, Q.C. and Jeff Aucoin, Articled Clerk, for the Defendant/Applicant By the Court: [1] Application to strike pleadings and for summary judgment granted in Chambers February 15, 2005 upon the court concluding that mere intentions, negotiations, etc., and pleadings of a cause of action failed to create a cause of action. [2] The written release of decision February 17, 2005 left counsel to attempt to reach agreement with respect to costs and disbursements failing which the court would receive representations from both parties which have now been received. [3] The originating notice action in this matter was filed July 21, 2003 and therefore the new tariff of September 29, 2004 does not apply, (Little v. Chignecto Central Regional School Board (2004), 2004 NSSC 265 (CanLII), 230 N.S.R. (2d)1). [4] There is no tariff that provides direction with respect to the determination of the amount of costs in Chambers’ applications. Normal Chambers’ applications have been awarding costs generally in the range of $250 to $750, (Hi-Fi Novelty Co. et al v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General) (1993), 1993 CanLII 4632 (NS SC), 121 N.S.R. (2d) 63. In many applications where the results brings finality the court has utilized Tariff “A”, Keating et al. v. Bragg et al. (1997), 1997 CanLII 1961 (NS CA), 160 N.S.R. (2d) 363. In this application Canada Lands sets out that its solicitor and client fees to the date of the hearing amounted to $24,856.50 plus disbursements of $510.97 and counsel for Chater indicate that his solicitor and client fees were approximately half that amount. While time sheets, etc., can be very helpful in determining party and party costs, the level of solicitors’ fees in this application is not very helpful in measuring an amount that is just and appropriate. [5] The hearing in this matter was less than two hours in duration, however, there were a number of steps taken prior to the application including filing a list of documents, exchange of documents and apparently two days of discovery. The defendant made an offer of settlement in the amount of $5,000, inclusive of costs, which take to be an attempt to have the action simply go away due to the heavy costs of litigation. As indicated, the sale price of the property which was approximately $2,000,000 was not, in my view, the appropriate “amount involved”, and it was very difficult and, in fact, impossible for me to really get handle on what amount of loss of profits was being pursued or to what extent the defendants were monetarily at risk. am left therefore with judgment call as to what is reasonable level of indemnity to the defendants who have been successful on an application which does dispose of the matter before the court. [6] In the circumstances, I think a reasonable and fit party and party level of costs is $5,000 plus disbursements of $510.97 and the defendant is entitled to judgment for costs and disbursements herein taxed and allowed in the amount of $5,510.97.
The court granted the defendant's application for summary judgment of claim. Costs were at issue. Costs awarded in the amount of $5,000 plus disbursements; although the hearing was less than 2 hours in length, there were a number of steps taken prior to the application, including two days of discovery examination.