Motion: Defendants requested class counsel’s dockets, redacted for privilege, to support the plaintiffs' costs claim related to certification and replacement plaintiff motions.
Plaintiffs’ Costs Claim: $623,341.78 in costs on a partial indemnity scale.
Court’s Decision: Justice Glustein denied the production of dockets.
Key Points:
Exceptional Cases: The court requires dockets only in exceptional cases. The plaintiffs argued that substantial costs or disparities alone do not justify docket production.
Precedent and Rules: The court referenced Boucher v. Public Accountants Council, emphasizing a fair and reasonable determination of costs without scrutinizing every docket. According to the Rules of Civil Procedure (r. 57.01(6)), costs outlines, not detailed dockets, are required for motions.
Arguments by Defendants:
Substantial Costs Claimed: Denied. Large costs do not alone justify docket production.
Disparity in Costs: Denied. Discrepancies can be challenged through costs outlines and historical costs awards.
Incongruities in Cost Outline: Denied. Alleged anomalies will be addressed through Boucher analysis and comparison to defendants’ costs.
Conclusion:
The motion for docket production was dismissed. Costs related to this motion will be addressed in the overall costs submissions.
Deadlines: Defendants’ costs submissions by May 17, 2024, and plaintiffs' reply by May 27, 2024.
No specific monetary award or damages were detailed in the provided document; the focus was on the procedural motion regarding cost submissions and docket production.
