Condominium Plan No 052, 2014 ABQB 685

Court of Queen ’ s Bench of Alberta Citation: Condominium Plan No 052 6233 v Seehra, 2014 ABQB 685 Date: 20141112 Docket: 1303 07069 Registry: Edmonton Between: The Owners: Condominium Plan No 052 6233 Applicant - and - Kulwant Seehra Respondent _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice Donald Lee _______________________________________________________ Background [ 1 ] Written reasons were issued by me in this matter on September 25 th , 2014 now reported at Condominium Plan No 052 6233

v Seehra , 2014 ABQB 588 . The sole issue now before the Court is to finalize the minutes of the order.

In dispute is whether or not the owners of Condominium Plan 052 6233 can claim the costs and expenses of the application which I heard on June 13 th , 2014 in Special Chambers, and include as “costs and legal expenses” the Applicant Corporation’s proceedings that related to the act or the omission of the Respondent Unit Holder which I found violated the corporations Bylaws. [ 2 ] A review of my September 25 th , 2014 decision indicates that I dealt with this issue at paragraph 25 of my Written Reasons which stated: 25 Following the applications for and the grant of these court Orders, the parties agreed to adjourn the matter of costs at the time they were obtained.

Consequently, although the within proceedings did not originate as "an action for debt" in the strict sense, it is clear that they relate to the recovery of the sum of money which the Applicant Corporation was required to, and did expend as a result of the Respondent's act or omission which violated the Condominium Corporation's Bylaws . Underlining Added [ 3 ] Accordingly the June 13 th , 2014 special chambers application was directly connected to the proceedings that related to the Respondent’s act or omission which violated the Condominium Corporation’s Bylaws.

As such I conclude that the cost of legal expenses incurred by the Condominium in the June 13 th , 2014 application are properly included in the form of order currently submitted herein for costs. [ 4 ] Paragraphs 1 and 3 are properly included in that order and they read as follows: “The Applicant, The Owners: Condominium Plan No. 052 6233, is awarded full indemnity, solicitor- client costs, for all costs and legal expenses incurred by the Applicant in connection with proceedings relating to the acts/omissions of the Respondent, which violated the Applicant’s Bylaws, including the costs and legal expenses of the within Application.” “The assessment officer shall ensure and confirm that the Applicant’s Bill of Costs reflects only the costs and legal expenses incurred by the Applicant in connection with the within proceedings relating to the acts/omissions of the Respondent, Kuiwant Seehra, which violated the Applicant’s Bylaws, including the costs and legal expenses of the within Application” [ 5 ] Furthermore in paragraph 29 of those Written Reasons I stated: 29 However, pursuant to the provisions of ARC , r 10.34, an Order is hereby issued for an assessment of the solicitor-client costs by the assessment officer.

The assessment officer is directed to ensure and confirm that the Applicant's Bill of Costs reflects only all the costs and legal expenses incurred by the Applicant Corporation in connection with the proceedings that relate to the act or omission of the Respondent Unit Owner, which violated the Corporation's Bylaws. [ 6 ] Pursuant to paragraph 29 of my Written Reasons, an assessment of the solicitor/client costs sought by the Condominium Corporation will be made by the assessment officer, who is directed to ensure and confirm that the applicants Bill of Costs reflects only the costs that were incurred by the Applicant Corporation in connection with the legal proceedings that relate to the act or omission of the Respondent Unit Holder which violated the Corporation’s Bylaws.

This assessment then will also include the Corporation’s solicitor/client costs associated with the June 13 th , 2014 Special Chambers application. Heard on the 29 th day of October, 2014. Dated at the City of Edmonton, Alberta this 12 th day of November, 2014. Donald Lee J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances:

Erin M. Berney Miller Thomson LLP for the Applicant Shawn Beaver and Tasneem Karbani Beaver Leebody Frank & Associates for the Respondent Stephanie C. Chau Witten LLP for the Royal Bank of Canada