Friends of the Calgary General Hospital Society v. Canada et al., (2000) 263 A.R. 191 (QB)

• Judge: Rowbotham, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: February 23, 2000
• Citations: (2000), 263 A.R. 191 (QB)

Calgary Hospital Soc. v. Can. (2000), 263 A.R. 191 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] A.R. TBEd. AP.073

Friends of the Calgary General Hospital Society, as representatives of the ratepayers of the City of Calgary and residents of southern Alberta (plaintiffs) v. Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada, Her Majesty The Queen in right of Alberta, as represented by the Minister of Public Works, Supply and Services and the Minister of Environmental Protection, and the City of Calgary, the Calgary General Hospital and its successors and assigns, the Calgary General Hospital Board and the Calgary Regional Health Authority (defendants)

(Action No. 9901-03864)

Indexed As: Friends of the Calgary General Hospital Society v. Canada et al.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Calgary

Rowbotham, J.

April 11, 2000.

Summary:

The Calgary General Hospital was incorporated in 1890. The Federal Crown granted three parcels of land to the hospital. In 1920, the City of Calgary became the registered owner of the lands and the hospital board retained ownership in the buildings on the land. In 1995, the Calgary Regional Health Authority decided to stop operating the Calgary General Hospital. The Friends of the Calgary General Hospital Society was incorporated to, inter alia, defend the public interest in the lands on which the hospital was situated. The Society registered two caveats against the hospital lands. The hospital was demolished. The City of Calgary gave the Society notice to take proceedings on the caveats. The Society commenced an action.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 258 A.R. 22, held, inter alia, that the caveats should be discharged. The parties made submissions respecting costs. The plaintiffs submitted that, because the case concerned a matter of public interest, no costs should be awarded the successful defendants. The defendants sought to have costs payable by the individual members of the Society.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench awarded the defendants costs, but declined to make the costs payable by the individual members of the Society.

Practice - Topic 7029.5

Costs - Party and party costs - Entitlement to party and party costs - Successful party - Exceptions - Where not in public or private interest - The Calgary Regional Health Authority decided to stop operating the Calgary General Hospital - The Friends of the Calgary General Hospital Society was incorporated to, inter alia, defend the public interest in the lands on which the hospital was situated - The Society registered two caveats against the lands and commenced and action to determine whether the charitable trust over the hospital lands had been violated - The trial judge held that the caveats should be discharged - The Society submitted that the court should exercise its discretion not to award costs because of the public interest character of the litigation - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the circumstances did not justify deviating from the customary rule - Although the Society met the serious issue and genuine interest requirements of public interest standing and was well placed to bring the issue before the court, the Society lacked standing because it did not meet the justiciability requirement - See paragraphs 3 to 5.

Practice - Topic 7770

Costs - Special orders - Liability of nonparty funding litigation - The Calgary Regional Health Authority decided to stop operating the Calgary General Hospital - The Friends of the Calgary General Hospital Society was incorporated to, inter alia, defend the public interest in the lands on which the hospital was situated - The Society registered two caveats against the lands and commenced and action to determine whether the charitable trust over the hospital lands had been violated - The trial judge held that the caveats should be discharged - The defendants submitted that the individual members of the Society were "the true promoters of the litigation" and should be responsible for the costs - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench declined to award costs against the individual members of the Society - See paragraphs 6 to 15.

Cases Noticed:

Vriend et al. v. Alberta (1996), 184 A.R. 351; 122 W.A.C. 351 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 3].

20th Century Television and Appliances Ltd. v. Midnapore Property Investments Ltd. (1992), 120 A.R. 114; 8 W.A.C. 114; 85 Alta. L.R.(2d) 114 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

269335 Alberta Ltd. v. Starlite Investments Ltd. et al. (1987), 18 C.P.C.(2d) 161 (Alta. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

Smith v. Canadian Tire Acceptance Ltd. (1995), 22 O.R.(3d) 433; 36 C.P.C.(3d) 175 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 9].

Smith v. Canadian Tire Acceptance Ltd. (1995), 26 O.R.(3d) 94; 40 C.P.C.(3d) 129 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

358427 Alberta Inc. v. Monenco Advisory Services Ltd. (1998), 242 A.R. 1; 57 Alta. L.R.(3d) 1 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

ADGA Systems International Ltd. v. Valcom Ltd. et al. (1999), 117 O.A.C. 39; 168 D.L.R.(4th) 351 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

155569 Canada Ltd. v. 248524 Alberta Ltd. (1999), 247 A.R. 239 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 9].

718632 Ontario Inc. v. Club 404 Ltd., [1994] O.J. No. 599 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 9].

Statutes Noticed:

Societies Act, R.S.A. 1980, c. S-18, sect. 17 [para. 7].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Orkin, The Law of Costs (2nd Ed.), pp. 2-82.1 to 2-82.2 [para. 10].

Counsel:

A.C. Rice, for the plaintiffs;

C. Ashcroft, for the defendant, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada;

D. Kinloch, for the defendant, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta;

A.J. McConnell, for the defendant, the Calgary General Hospital Board and the Calgary Regional Health Authority;

M. Young, for the defendant, the City of Calgary.

This matter was heard on February 23, 2000, before Rowbotham, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Calgary, who delivered the following reasons for judgment re costs on April 11, 2000.