Key Issues

• Sterling O&G International Corp. sought $5 million for costs and delays.
• Sterling’s supported claim was $5,749 in fees and disbursements.
• Alamos and co-defendants argued no costs should be awarded or at most $1,500 plus disbursements.

Court’s Analysis and Decision

• Costs are discretionary under s. 131 of the Courts of Justice Act and rule 57.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
• Sterling’s $5 million claim was unsupported and deemed excessive.
• Sterling's actual costs were considered, but self-represented litigants like Mr. Thawani need to show lost opportunity costs to recover fees.
• Mr. Thawani did not substantiate any lost remunerative activity.
• Only court filing fees ($339) were deemed substantiated; other disbursements lacked proof.
• Alamos’ offer to settle for $3,000 plus notarial and court filing fees was reasonable.
• No costs were awarded due to the unsubstantiated claims and lack of compliance by Sterling.

Additional Comments

• Mr. Thawani’s conduct and allegations against Alamos were unsubstantiated.
• Future conduct similar to this may result in revocation of the leave granted to Mr. Thawani to represent Sterling.
• Accuracy, measure, and proper substantiation are emphasized for future filings by Mr. Thawani.

Conclusion

• The court decided that each party should bear their own costs, awarding no costs to any party.