Phillips Legal Professional Corp. v. Holm, (2013) 411 Sask.R. 112 (PC)

• Judge: Bogdasavich, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: January 04, 2013
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2013), 411 Sask.R. 112 (PC);2013 SKPC 2

Phillips Legal Prof. Corp. v. Holm (2013), 411 Sask.R. 112 (PC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] Sask.R. TBEd. JA.024

Phillips Legal Professional Corporation v. Sharon Lynette Holm

(292/2010; 2013 SKPC 2)

Indexed As: Phillips Legal Professional Corp. v. Holm

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Civil Division

Bogdasavich, P.C.J.

January 4, 2013.

Summary:

The plaintiff was retained to provide legal services to the defendant in a matrimonial matter. Nearly 21 months later, the defendant changed solicitors. The plaintiff rendered a final account for legal services of $24,349.04, which was the balance owed after credit was given for payment of an "Interim Account" of $3,000 and a "Courtesy Discount" of $25,095. The plaintiff claimed judgment in the amount of $20,000. The defendant alleged that "the vast majority of the services provided by the plaintiff were unnecessary, redundant, duplicitous, needless and were absolutely of no value to the defendant". The defendant counterclaimed for transportation, hotel and other expenses which were incurred by her unnecessarily.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court concluded that the value to the defendant of the legal services provided by the plaintiff should be set at $10,000. The sum of $3,881.08 (amounts already received by the plaintiff) were deducted from the $10,000 leaving a balance owing by the defendant of $6,118.92. To that, the court added disbursements (plus the tax) of $699.04. The plaintiff was therefore entitled to a judgment in the amount of $6,817.96 with respect to its claim. The defendant was entitled to $2,000 in damages with respect to her counterclaim, which was set off against the amount of the claim. Accordingly, the plaintiff was entitled to judgment in the amount of $4,817.96.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1502

Relationship with client - General - Lawyer as fiduciary - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1548 ].

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1548

Relationship with client - Duty to client - General - Fiduciary duty - The plaintiff claimed against the defendant for payment for legal services provided by the plaintiff to the defendant in a matrimonial matter - The defendant alleged that "the vast majority of the services provided by the plaintiff were unnecessary, redundant, duplicitous, needless and were absolutely of no value to the defendant" - The defendant counterclaimed for transportation, hotel and other expenses which were incurred by her unnecessarily - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court allowed the counterclaim, holding that there had been a breach of the fiduciary duty owed to the defendant by the plaintiff - When a lawyer undertook to act for a client he/she had to act in the exclusive interests of that client - When a lawyer put his/her own monetary interest ahead of that of his/her client there was a breach of the fiduciary duty - The plaintiff put his own monetary interest ahead of that of the defendant by: (1) not expressly advising the defendant when he was retained, or in a reasonable time thereafter, of his hourly fee, his billing procedure, and some range of what his total bill might be; (2) "rounding up" the time spent on telephone and other attendances; and (3) engaging in unnecessary work on the file and requiring the defendant to attend at his office on numerous occasions - The plaintiff was entitled to damages respecting expenses she incurred in travelling to some medical appointments and unnecessary attendances at the plaintiff's office - The court fixed her damages "somewhat arbitrarily" at $2,000 - See paragraphs 62 to 81.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 3002

Compensation - General - Duty to client to minimize fees - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1548 ].

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 3003

Compensation - General - Duty to inform client - General - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1548 ].

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 3303

Compensation - Measure of compensation - Relevant considerations - The plaintiff was retained to provide legal services to the defendant in a matrimonial matter - Nearly 21 months later, the defendant changed solicitors - The plaintiff rendered a final account for legal services of $24,349.04, which was the balance owed after credit was given for payment of an "Interim Account" of $3,000 and a "Courtesy Discount" of $25,095 - The account showed that the plaintiff provided 141.70 hours of legal services - The plaintiff claimed judgment in the amount of $20,000 - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court considered the results obtained and the complexity and importance of the matter and concluded that the value to the defendant of the legal services provided by the plaintiff should be set at $10,000 - The sum of $3,881.08 (amounts already received by the plaintiff) were deducted from the $10,000 leaving a balance owing by the defendant of $6,118.92 - To that, the court added disbursements (plus the tax) of $699.04 - The defendant therefore owed the plaintiff $6,817.96 for legal services provided - See paragraphs 57 to 61.

Courts - Topic 8146

Provincial courts - Saskatchewan - Small Claims - Debt or damages -The Saskatchewan Provincial Court stated that "The courts have recognized a wide range of remedies as available to a trial judge for breach of fiduciary duty including equitable compensation for the 'injury' suffered. I am satisfied such compensation falls within the statutory jurisdiction given to this Court. The word 'damages' in subsection 3(1) of The Small Claims Act, 1997, includes not only 'common law damages' but 'equitable damages' or what is sometimes referred to as equitable compensation. Certainly equitable remedies are contemplated by the Act as subsection 3(1)(c) lists 'specific performance' as an available remedy. The Act should be given a wide interpretation and judges of this Court frequently give equitable remedies based on doctrines such as quantum meruit and unjust enrichment" - See paragraph 80.

Cases Noticed:

Sandstrom & Scott and United Chemicals Ltd., Re, [1989] 5 W.W.R. 690; 74 Sask.R. 59 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 58].

Hatch v. Cooper et al. (2001), 214 Sask.R. 1 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 63].

K-J Plumbing et al. v. Quarles & Brady et al., 2012 Ariz.Unpub.LEXIS 250, refd to. [para. 67].

Bird, Marella, Boxer & Wolpert et al. v. Superior Court et al., 106 Cal. App. 4th 419, refd to. [para. 67].

Galpern v. De Vos & Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117095, refd to. [para. 70].

U.S. Ice Cream Corp. v. Bizar, 240 A.D. 2d. 654, refd to. [para. 70].

International Corona Resources Ltd. v. LAC Minerals Ltd., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 574; 101 N.R. 239; 36 O.A.C. 57, refd to. [para. 72].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Maddaugh, Peter D., and McCamus, John D., The Law of Restitution (Looseleaf), p. 27-3, para. 27-200 [para. 71].

Counsel:

Brad Tilling and Mervin C. Phillips, for the plaintiff;

C. Mervin Ozirny, for the defendant.

This action and counterclaim were heard at Regina, Saskatchewan, before Bogdasavich, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on January 4, 2013.