IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

Date: 20111220

Docket: M091852

Registry:
Vancouver

Between:

Harry
Quartey-Harrison

Plaintiff

And

Darren Klusiewich,
Susan Barber,

GMAC Leaseco Corporation/La
Compagnie GMAC Location,

John Doe, Jane Doe

and
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia

Defendants

Before:
The Honourable Madam Justice Baker

Ruling on Costs

[1]            
The trial of this action was heard on May 19, 2011.  On August 3, 2011,
I issued Reasons for Judgment in relation to this personal injury lawsuit.  The
only issue at trial was the assessment of damages; liability for negligence
having been admitted by the defendants some time earlier.   I awarded the
plaintiff special damages of $910.56 and general damages of $18,000 for a total
award of $18,910.56.  I declined to award compensation for past lost of income,
loss or impairment of the capacity to earn income in future, or future care.

[2]            
In relation to Costs, I stated the following:

Unless there are factors of which
I am unaware, such as offers of settlement, Mr. Quartey-Harrison is entitled to
his costs of the action, to be assessed on Scale B.  If there are factors
relevant to costs that should be considered by the court, the plaintiff and counsel
for the defendants are given leave to file written submissions after which I
shall issue a further Decision on costs.  If no written submissions have been
received by September 15, 2011, the award of costs to Mr. Quartey-Harrison on
Scale B shall be in effect.

[3]            
On September 13, 2011, counsel for the defendants filed a written
submission with respect to costs.   At my request, one of the Trial Managers
contacted Mr. Quartey-Harrison to inquire if he intended to file a
submission about costs.  He indicated he did not intend to respond to the
defendants’ written submission.

[4]            
In the circumstances of this case, I conclude that each party should
bear his or her own costs, but that Mr. Quartey-Harrison is entitled to recover
his disbursements.

[5]            
The defendants submit that Rule 14-1(10) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules
should be applied.  That Rule provides that a plaintiff who recovers a monetary
judgment within the jurisdiction of the Provincial Court under the Small
Claims Act is not entitled to costs, other than disbursements, unless the
court finds that there was sufficient reason for bringing the proceeding in the
Supreme Court and so orders.

[6]            
The burden is on the plaintiff to justify his choice of forum.  The
court is to consider the circumstances at the time the action was commenced.

[7]            
In this case, Mr. Quartey-Harrison has made no submissions on costs and
has offered no evidence on the issue of “sufficient reason” for bringing the
proceeding in the Supreme Court.  In the circumstances, I do not think that I should
speculate.

[8]            
In my view, the evidence at trial made it plain and obvious that no
award for past or future loss of income or the capacity to earn income, was
warranted, and that the mild whiplash type injury suffered by Mr.
Quartey-Harrison was unlikely to result in an award in excess of the $25,000
monetary limit in Small Claims Court.

[9]            
I have carefully considered the submissions made by the defendants in
respect of the defendants’ settlement offer but have concluded that Mr.
Quartey-Harrison’s right to recover disbursements should not be nullified by
the offer.

[10]        
In summary, each party shall bear its own costs, but the plaintiff is
entitled to recover his disbursements from the defendants.

“W.G. Baker J.”