Not exact matches
In Hicks v. Hicks, 16 E.T.R. (2d) 179, Mr. Justice Shaw awarded full indemnity for costs against the defendant, as a result of his reprehensible conduct in exercising undue influence over his elderly mothe
In Hicks v. Hicks, 16 E.T.R. (2d) 179, Mr. Justice Shaw awarded
full indemnity for
costs against the defendant, as a result of his reprehensible conduct
in exercising undue influence over his elderly mothe
in exercising undue influence over his elderly mother.
«
In my opinion, the surreptitious and dishonest conduct of Edward was so highly reprehensible as to warrant an award of
full indemnity, that is, solicitor and own client
costs.
If the conflict of interest issue were characterized
in this way, the insured's right to
full indemnity costs ought to have flowed from the principle that an insured should not to be put to expense
in securing a defence under the policy.
In additional reasons, the court concluded that
full indemnity costs on the motion were not appropriate.
Having been substantially successful at trial, the claimant sought
full indemnity for legal
costs based upon a clause
in an assignment agreement which had been entered into by the parties.
The Ontario Court of Appeal has consistently held that the insured is «entitled to a defence... at no
cost to them».2
In other words, an insured is «entitled to be made financially whole» for legal costs incurred in securing a defence under the policy.3 This broad principle has not only been used to indemnify insureds for their past defence costs, but also the future defence costs of counsel of their choice, the costs of the coverage application and the costs of any subsequent appeal.4 This principle of full indemnity is based, not in the law of costs, but in the law of contrac
In other words, an insured is «entitled to be made financially whole» for legal
costs incurred
in securing a defence under the policy.3 This broad principle has not only been used to indemnify insureds for their past defence costs, but also the future defence costs of counsel of their choice, the costs of the coverage application and the costs of any subsequent appeal.4 This principle of full indemnity is based, not in the law of costs, but in the law of contrac
in securing a defence under the policy.3 This broad principle has not only been used to indemnify insureds for their past defence
costs, but also the future defence
costs of counsel of their choice, the
costs of the coverage application and the
costs of any subsequent appeal.4 This principle of
full indemnity is based, not
in the law of costs, but in the law of contrac
in the law of
costs, but
in the law of contrac
in the law of contract.
[29] The legislature chose not to provide a specific
cost consequence for an insurer's failure to participate
in mediation, such as substantial
indemnity costs against a losing defendant or deprivation of
full costs of a winning defendant.
Limit on cross-examinations 7 (1) Subject to subsection (2), cross-examinations on any documentary evidence filed by the parties shall not exceed a total of seven hours for all plaintiffs
in the proceeding and seven hours for all defendants (2) A judge may extend the time permitted for cross-examination on documentary evidence if it is necessary to do so
in the interest of justice
Costs on dismissal 8 (1) If a judge dismisses a proceeding under this section, the moving party is entitled to costs on the motion and in the proceeding on a full indemnity basis, unless the judge determines that such an award is not appropriate in the circumsta
Costs on dismissal 8 (1) If a judge dismisses a proceeding under this section, the moving party is entitled to
costs on the motion and in the proceeding on a full indemnity basis, unless the judge determines that such an award is not appropriate in the circumsta
costs on the motion and
in the proceeding on a
full indemnity basis, unless the judge determines that such an award is not appropriate
in the circumstances.
Special
costs to successful applicants
in most cases Defendants who succeed
in having the claims against them stuck under this law should be entitled to
costs on a
full indemnity basis, subject to a judge's discretion
in exceptional cases where such are not warranted.
If a defendant is successful
in having a libel action dismissed on this basis, there is a presumption of
costs being awarded on a
full indemnity basis, the statute says.
In the recent Hoang v The Personal Insurance Co., 2017 ONSC 4193 (CanLII) case, the Court ordered the insurance company to pay
full indemnity costs (all legal fees) where the insurance company had wrongfully denied coverage.
The corporation claimed
full indemnity of its legal
costs in the amount of $ 35,495 on the basis that the condominium declaration specifically provided that an owner would fully indemnify the corporation for any
costs or damages resulting from an owner's act or omission.
But
in his opinion the conduct of the Defendant
in this case also warranted
full -
indemnity costs as well because,
Claimants argue that they should be compensated for those
costs in full, or at least on a Solicitors Act 1974 or
indemnity basis of assessment.
If the action is dismissed, the legislation provides for
costs to be awarded on a
full indemnity basis and allows the motion judge, if the court finds the action to have been brought
in bad faith or for an improper purpose (i.e. a SLAPP), to order damages to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant.
The motion judge held that the repetition of these accusations, which had already been rejected
in court, justified awarding
costs against Mr. Best on a
full indemnity scale.
User shall indemnify and hold Exide Life and / or the Affiliates, as the case may be, including their officers, employees and agents, indemnified against all losses and expenses on
full indemnity basis which Exide Life may incur, sustain, suffer or is likely to suffer
in connection with Exide Life or Affiliates» execution of the User's instructions and against all actions, claims, demands, proceedings, losses, damages,
costs, charges and expenses as a consequence or by reason of providing a service through payment gateway for any action taken or omitted to be taken by Exide Life and / or the Affiliates, its officers, employees or agents, on the instructions of the User.