In his recent decision on the Estate of Felice Pipito (Re), 2022 ONSC 1802 (CanLII), Justice Dunphy explains his reasoning for awarding costs, after having previously made his Judgment in the matter in December 2021.

The Applicant, in this matter, was the daughter of the Deceased, while the two Respondents were respectively the Deceased’s granddaughter and great-grandson. The primary issue in contention was the Deceased’s Etobicoke home, for which the Respondents had been added on title as joint tenants. The Applicant sought to set aside this joint tenancy on the basis that the Deceased did not have enough command of the English language to have understood the significance of granting a joint tenancy. Justice Dunphy ultimately decided that, among other issues, the joint tenancy was legitimate and that the Applicant’s claim would be dismissed with costs.

In his subsequent costs decision, Justice Dunphy commented on his reasoning when fixing costs in a case such as this one. First, he took exception to the Applicant’s extremely negative behaviour over the course of litigation, described as “spite, venom and antipathy,” and that “the vicious but entirely unproved personal attacks made by her on her opponents deserve sanction.” Second, he noted that because the Applicant had acted as self-represented litigant, advancing a spurious and acrimonious claim, in a manner that “lacked focus and coherence,” she had forced the Respondents to expend more legal costs than they would have otherwise, had she retained sensible counsel. Third and finally, the Applicant rejected two reasonable offers to settle, at earlier stages of litigation, which would have resolved the matter on terms relatively favourable to both sides.

As a result, Justice Dunphy awarded costs on a substantial indemnity scale to the Respondents, totalling $60,000.00.

Thank you for reading!

Fred Tonelli