In this slip and fall lawsuit there was mixed success on the defendant’s application for production of records of the treating psychiatrist. However, it was the award of costs against the claimant’s lawyer which is of note:

[19] I am deeply troubled by the positions plaintiff’s counsel took on this application, including seeking an order for special costs against the counsel for the defendant personally pursuant to Rule 14‑1(33)(c).  In my view, defendant’s counsel has conducted himself as he should have throughout, given the uncertainty involved in the pleadings, and it was entirely unwarranted to seek the orders sought against him.  Because the application response filed by counsel for the plaintiff sought costs against the counsel for the defendant personally, he was required to retain separate counsel to attend this hearing to represent him.  That counsel is Ms. H.

[20]  In my view, there was no basis for the position taken by plaintiff’s counsel.  The attendance of special counsel was unnecessary, and it is the conduct of plaintiff’s counsel that has resulted in this application, in my view, an unnecessary application, and for unnecessary costs to be incurred.  Pursuant to Rule 14‑1(33)(c), I am ordering that the costs of the attendance of Ms. H at this hearing be payable personally by Ms. L [ lawyer for thr claimant].  I am assessing those costs at $2,000 payable forthwith. (Dupas v. City of Richmond,2018 BCSC 1059)

Posted by Personal Injury Lawyer Mr. Rernn A. Holness, B.A. LL.B.