Mancha Consultants v. Can. Square, (1999) 117 O.A.C. 312 (CA)

• Judge: McMurtry, C.J.O., Laskin and Rosenberg, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: May 14, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1999), 117 O.A.C. 312 (CA)

Mancha Consultants v. Can. Square (1999), 117 O.A.C. 312 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] O.A.C. TBEd. MR.039

Mancha Consultants Ltd., Alan Chapple and Michael Manley (appellants) v. Canada Square Development Corporation Ltd. (respondent)

(C19288)

Indexed As: Mancha Consultants Ltd. et al. v. Canada Square Development Corp.

Ontario Court of Appeal

McMurtry, C.J.O., Laskin

and Rosenberg, JJ.A.

February 17, 1999.

Summary:

The plaintiffs and the defendant orally agreed to redevelop jointly two properties. The redevelopment of one property was deferred. The defendant then acquired the second property for itself. The plaintiffs sued for breach of contract and related relief. The trial judge dismissed the action. The plain­tiffs appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, in a decision reported at 110 O.A.C. 52, allowed the appeal, directed a reference on damages and awarded the appellants their costs of the trial and appeal. The appellants sought to vary­ the costs order to give discre­tion to the judge hearing the trial on remedy to increase costs to a solicitor and client scale as part of an over­all rem­edy.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the motion.

Practice - Topic 7410

Costs - Solicitor and client costs - Gen­eral principles - Time for award - The plaintiffs and the defend­ant orally agreed to jointly redevelop a property - The defendant acquired the property for itself - The plain­tiffs sued for breach of contract and related relief - The trial judge dis­missed the action - The plaintiffs appealed - The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, directed a reference on dam­ages and awarded the plaintiffs their costs of the trial and appeal - The plain­tiffs sought to vary the costs order to give the judge hear­ing the trial on remedy discre­tion to increase costs to a solicitor and client scale as part of an over­all rem­edy - The Ontario Court of Appeal dis­missed the motion - The plain­tiffs did not seek the order when the appeal was argued and the defendant's conduct was not suffi­ciently reprehensible to justify solicitor and client costs.

Practice - Topic 7452

Costs - Solicitor and client costs - Enti­tlement to solicitor and client costs - Ne­glect or misconduct - [See Practice - Topic 7410 ].

Counsel:

William G. Horton and Markhus Koehnen, for the appellants;

John T. Morin and Michael J.W. Round, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on December 8 and 9, 1998, by McMurtry, C.J.O., Laskin and Rosenberg, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Laskin, J.A., on May 14, 1998. The Court of Appeal released the following addendum on February 17, 1999.