Liu v. Composites Atlantic Ltd., (2014) 345 N.S.R.(2d) 100 (SC)

• Judge: Coady, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: January 17, 2014
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (2014), 345 N.S.R.(2d) 100 (SC);2014 NSSC 176

Liu v. Composites Atlantic Ltd. (2014), 345 N.S.R.(2d) 100 (SC);

    1092 A.P.R. 100

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. JN.033

Guo Yi (Jim) Liu (plaintiff) v. Composites Atlantic Limited (defendant)

(Halifax No. 408022; 2014 NSSC 176)

Indexed As: Liu v. Composites Atlantic Ltd.

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Coady, J.

May 13, 2014.

Summary:

Liu sued his former employer for wrongful dismissal. After the close of pleadings, he brought a motion for summary judgment on the evidence. The motion was scheduled to be heard on July 2, 2013. The employer requested an adjournment. Moir, J., granted the request and the summary judgment motion was subsequently rescheduled for October 15, 2013. Liu appealed Moir, J.'s decision to adjourn the summary judgment motion. On October 15, 2013, Coady, J., dismissed the summary judgment motion. Liu also appealed Coady, J.'s decision. Liu, who lived in Ontario, filed a motion for dates and directions. Included in the motion was a request to transfer both of his appeals to be heard by the Ontario Court of Appeal. In support for his motion, he cited the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act, S.N.S. 2003, c. 2.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, per Beveridge, J.A., dismissed the motion to transfer the proceeding, holding that the Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction to make such an order. See 339 N.S.R.(2d) 30; 1073 A.P.R. 30. The employer brought a motion under Civil Procedure Rule 90.42 for an order requiring Liu to post security for costs. Liu did not attend although he had been served with the motion materials.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, per Farrar, J.A., allowed the application and ordered Liu to post security for costs of $15,000 on or before April 14, 2014, failing which, the employer would be at liberty to make a motion to dismiss this appeal. The court granted the defendant employer costs of the motion in the amount of $1,500 inclusive of disbursements payable forthwith. See 342 N.S.R.(2d) 191; 1083 A.P.R. 191. On January 17, 2014, Coady, J., ordered Liu to post $30,000 security for costs within 30 days. Coady, J., further ordered that if Liu failed to post the security as ordered, the court would dismiss the action and consider any application for costs. Liu did not comply with the order. In addition, he failed to pay all past cost orders before he could start any further process. He stated that he would not do so at any time. He had not paid the $1,000 costs plus disbursements awarded on the security application.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court dismissed the action. The court held that the defendant employer was entitled to solicitor-client costs. The court awarded lump sum costs of $50,000 plus a $3,000 contribution to disbursements. This award was in addition to existing costs awards. The $50,000 included HST.

Practice - Topic 5373

Dismissal of action - Grounds - General and want of prosecution - Failure to comply with court order - [See Practice - Topic 7403.1 ].

Practice - Topic 5377

Dismissal of action - Grounds - General and want of prosecution - Failure to pay interlocutory costs - [See Practice - Topic 7403.1 ].

Practice - Topic 7403.1

Costs - Solicitor and client costs - General principles - Full indemnity vs. substantial indemnity costs - A plaintiff (Liu) failed to comply with numerous costs orders - He stated that he would not do so at any time - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court dismissed the action - The defendant employer was entitled to solicitor-client costs - The court awarded lump sum costs of $50,000 plus a $3,000 contribution to disbursements - This award was in addition to existing costs awards - The $50,000 included HST - Liu had conducted this litigation in a highly vexatious and frivolous manner - He had never acted reasonably and had been obstructionist every step of the way - He had displayed nothing but complete disrespect for the court and its procedures - He continued to accuse counsel, the judiciary and staff of corruption, perjury, forgery, bias, discrimination and fraud - He ignored any censure of these activities - Liu's conduct was "reprehensible, scandalous and outrageous" - This was one of the rare and exceptional cases where solicitor-client costs were warranted - The court was not prepared to award the defendant full recovery of its actual costs - However, Liu's conduct demanded substantial recovery - The court awarded the defendant lump sum costs of $50,000 plus a $3,000 contribution to disbursements - This award was in addition to existing costs awards - The $50,000 included HST.

Practice - Topic 7427.1

Costs - Solicitor and client costs - Measure of - Lump sum - [See Practice - Topic 7403.1 ].

Practice - Topic 7454

Costs - Solicitor and client costs - Entitlement to solicitor and client costs - Improper, irresponsible or unconscionable conduct - [See Practice - Topic 7403.1 ].

Practice - Topic 7458

Costs - Solicitor and client costs - Entitlement to solicitor and client costs - Rare, exceptional or complex cases - [See Practice - Topic 7403.1 ].

Cases Noticed:

Smith's Field Manor Development Ltd. v. Campbell - see Campbell v. Lienaux et al.

Campbell v. Lienaux et al. (2001), 195 N.S.R.(2d) 220; 609 A.P.R. 220; 2001 NSSC 44, refd to. [para. 9].

Young v. Young et al., [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3; 160 N.R. 1; 34 B.C.A.C. 161; 56 W.A.C. 161; 108 D.L.R.(4th) 193, refd to. [para. 10].

Richards v. Richards et al. (2013), 335 N.S.R.(2d) 203; 1060 A.P.R. 203; 2013 NSSC 269, refd to. [para. 11].

Armoyan v. Armoyan (2013), 337 N.S.R.(2d) 365; 1067 A.P.R. 365; 2013 NSCA 136, refd to. [para. 12].

Williamson v. Williams et al. (1998), 223 N.S.R.(2d) 78; 705 A.P.R. 78 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

Counsel:

Guo Yi (Jim) Liu, self-represented;

Jack Graham, Q.C., and Michael Murphy, for Composites Atlantic Limited.

This case was heard in Halifax, N.S., on January 17, 2014, by Coady, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision on May 13, 2014.