Humby et al. v. Howitt et al., 2007 MBQB 7

• Judge: Schulman, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: January 12, 2007
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: 2007 MBQB 7;(2007), 215 Man.R.(2d) 5 (QB)

Humby v. Howitt (2007), 215 Man.R.(2d) 5 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2007] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. JA.029

Peggy Humby, Karen Kemp, Gordon Dafor, Shelly Overwater, Warrick Humby, Bill Duberry, Shirley Kennedy, Wayne Levac, Abbie Humby, Andy Hopkins, Ron Brown and Janet Krahenbil, as electors of the City of Thompson (applicants) v. Norma Howitt and City of Thompson (respondents)

(CI 05-15-00123; 2007 MBQB 7)

Indexed As: Humby et al. v. Howitt et al.

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Thompson Centre

Schulman, J.

January 12, 2007.

Summary:

The applicants moved for a determination of whether Howitt, a member of city council, was a resident of the city and, if not, whether her position should be vacated.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 204 Man.R.(2d) 293, held that Howitt was a city resident and ordered the applicants to pay costs to Howitt and the city. The applicants sought leave to appeal the costs order under s. 90(1)(b) of the Court of Queen's Bench Act.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench denied leave to appeal.

Practice - Topic 8298

Costs - Appeals - Appeals from order granting or denying costs - Requirement of leave to appeal - The applicants moved for a determination of whether Howitt, a member of city council, was a resident of the city and, if not, whether her position should be vacated - The applicants added the city as a respondent on the basis that it should be ordered to pay solicitor/client costs because it failed to bring the application itself and because it acted inappropriately in several ways - Schulman, J., dismissed the application and ordered the applicants to pay Hewitt's costs - Schulman, J., ordered the applicants to indemnify the city for all legal costs reasonably incurred (i.e., solicitor and client costs) on the basis that the applicants' allegations against the city were unfounded and the city should not have been made a party - The applicants sought leave to appeal the costs order under s. 90(1)(b) of the Court of Queen's Bench Act - They submitted that they were public interest litigants - No such submission was made at the original hearing - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench denied leave to appeal - The applicants failed to show a good arguable case of issues of importance against Howitt or the city.

Authors and Works Noticed:

Orkin, Mark M., The Law of Costs (2nd Ed.) (2006 Looseleaf Supp.), vol. 2, pp. 2-264 [para. 9]; 8-6 [para. 2].

Counsel:

Robert A. Mayer, Q.C., for the applicants;

Gavin Wood, for the respondent, N. Howitt;

Ted E. Bock, for the respondent, the City of Thompson.

This leave application was heard before Schulman, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Thompson Centre, who delivered the following judgment on January 12, 2007.