The Lawyers Weekly - Sample Issue

1.800.265.8381 | www.mckellar.com

Vol. 33, No. 3

may 17, 2013

lawyersweekly.ca

Ontario appeal court approves
$750 rate, nearly $1 million bill
Prof raises
questions on
highway stops

CHRISTOPHER GULY

Also endorses ‘team approach’ in handling family case

CRISTIN SCHMITZ

OTTAWA

In two cost rulings favourable to lawyers, the Ontario Court of Appeal has approved law firm bills in separate family law cases, including a nearly $1-million tab from a leading counsel whose hourly rate was $750.

In Stevens v. Stevens [2013] O.J. No. 1912, the appeal court dismissed Joel Stevens’ challenge to a lower court order last year requiring him to pay Pamela Stevens $924,057 as full recovery for her legal costs in their battle over the validity of their marriage contract. Stevens argued the hourly rates charged by his wife’s lawyers were excessive, but the appeal court held there was “no serious challenge” to the hours spent, and rates claimed by senior family law counsel Stephen Grant and his team.

“While the costs awarded by the trial judge are certainly very high,” said the panel, they “are largely attributable to the appellant’s behaviour in this litigation,” including the husband’s lack of adequate disclosure and refusal to take “a very reasonable offer of settlement.”

Stephen Grant, of Toronto’s Grant and Sadvari, billed $750 per hour in a recent family law case, which the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled was within the boundary of reasonableness given the circumstances. The trial judge had also pointed out that opposing counsel billed $685 per hour. Johncarlo lista, new Paramount studios

“While this costs award pushes
reasonableness and proportion-
ality to their limits, in the end,
we see no error,” said Justices
Karen Weiler, Robert Sharpe
and Paul Rouleau in their per
curiam decision April 29. The
trial judge found that Grant, of
Toronto’s Grant and Sadvari,
and co-counsel Gillian Kerr
“were extremely thorough and
of great assistance to their
client.” There was a lengthy trial,
the case dragged on for two
Billing, Page 9

A recent Ontario Court of Appeal endorsement of a trial judge’s exclusion of evidence arising from a warrantless search further reveals that police are not abiding by the Charter, legal observers say.

The province’s high court agreed with Justice Donald Ebbs’ acquittal last year of Jesse Nartey on multiple firearm and drug-related charges after two police officers discovered about a half-pound of marijuana, two bags of crack cocaine and two loaded guns during a Highway Traffic Act stop.

Justice Ebbs found the police were on a “fishing trip” after a computer check revealed Nartey had been convicted of possession for the purposes of trafficking and was subject to two firearm prohibitions. The traffic stop became an improper investigative detention, and a pat-down search of the accused and the subsequent search of his vehicle were contrary to Charter standards, he ruled.

The Court of Appeal, in R. v. Nartey [2013] O. J. No. 1550, dismissed the Crown’s appeal. Justices Robert Sharpe, David Watt and Alexandra Hoy pointed that the trial judge characterized the senior officer as trying to “tailor his evidence to fit a pattern” allowed by the courts, and, as a result, determined that the

Police, Page 23

BUSINESS & CAREERS
IMMIGRATION

What makes for mastery?

Telecommute
tribulations
Don’t overstay
your welcome

How to become an expert
paralegal or law clerk
LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT
PAGE 10
Family status has become
human rights frontier
Unlawful presence rule
now applies to Canadians

PAGE 20 STB_LW_basebar_03_12v2_STG 3/15/12 4: 24 PM Page 1

PAGE 14

The title insurer that puts you front row, centre

Putting the legal community front and centre has made us the #1 choice with Canadian lawyers/notaries for over a decade. Stewart Title does not support programs that reduce or eliminate the lawyer’s/notary’s role in real estate transactions.