In considering the issue of costs, factors taken into account include: 1) the rates charged and the hours spent by the plaintiff’s counsel; 2) the amount claimed and the amount recovered by the plaintiff; 3) the complexity of the proceeding and the importance of the issues; 4) the conduct of any party that tended to shorten or lengthen the proceeding; 5) whether the action should have been brought under the simplified rules pursuant to Rule 76; and 6) the reasonableness of the costs.
Einav Shlomovitz
Einav practices exclusively in civil litigation. Her practice focuses on motor vehicle accident, accident benefits, occupier’s liability, slip/trip and falls, dog bites, medical malpractice, solicitor negligence, class action, employment and sexual assault claims.
During her free time, Einav takes improv and Spanish lessons. She enjoys being active, traveling, and spending time with family and friends.
Watts v. Bowman, 2016 ONSC 3994 (CanLII)
In order to determine whether a driver of a vehicle has the implied consent of the owner of the vehicle to drive it, the court has to ascertain what he or she actually did under the circumstances, not what he or she would have done under different circumstances. The court cannot speculate on whether or not an owner would consent to allow a vehicle to be driven if the driver had requested the permission.
Mamado v. Fridson, 2016 ONSC 4080 (CanLII)
At the conclusion of trial, the defendant brought a threshold motion and called two expert witnesses in support of the motion: Dr. Soric and Dr. Reznek. The Court found that the evidence from both witnesses contained serious flaws and expressed concern regarding how the majority of their income was derived from conducting medical-legal work for defendants. The motion was denied.
Clatney v. Quinn Thiele Mineault Grodski LLP, 2016 ONCA 377
In special circumstances, the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to reopen contingency fee agreements that have been paid and order an assessment to be conducted to ensure public confidence in the administration of justice.
Sanzone v. Schechter, 2016 ONCA 566
This appeal to set aside a dismissal granted at a summary judgment motion was allowed on the basis that the respondents failed to present evidence going to the merits of their defence but instead attempted to compel the appellant to deliver an expert report and show that she has not done so.
Gardiner v. MacDonald, 2016 ONSC 602
This case affirms that liability in motor vehicle accidents is not clear-cut, even in cases where the right of way is undisputed. In apportioning liability for an accident, the court will assess the reasonableness of each driver’s actions in the circumstances. Professional drivers will be held to a higher standard of care than ordinary drivers in similar situations.
