[11] Counsel is seeking costs of one-third of the damages awarded in the AB claim and the tort claim pursuant to the contingency fee agreements signed by Claude Pothier on August 1, 2006, and January 30, 2014. This latter agreement expands the original agreement by explaining that the fees on the tort action and the AB claim would be subject to the one-third amount. This results in fees of $466,000, HST of $37,280 and disbursements of $84,510 for a total of $587,790.
[23] I have no hesitation in approving the awards made, both on the tort action and the AB claim. What has concerned me, however, is the amount of fees being suggested by the law firm.
[24] I appreciate that this settlement came about as a result of a global resolution of the tort action and the AB claim. However, this does not mean that I am obliged to award fees on the global resolution.
[34] Considering that these dockets were reconstructed and not made contemporaneously at the time the work was done, little weight can be placed on the estimate of the time involved.
[52] The sum of $280,500 is sought for legal fees in connection with the AB claim pursuant to the contingency fee agreement. Having considered all of the evidence and the legal principles, I conclude that there should be a reduction on the fees proposed on the AB claim. In my view, counsel has not succeeded in proving that the contingency fee agreement was fair and reasonable under the circumstances. Accordingly, fees for the AB claim will be fixed at $170,000, inclusive of HST, and fees for the tort action will be fixed at $183,333, inclusive of HST, for a total of $353,333.
[53] Disbursements are fixed at $84,510, inclusive of HST.
Sealing Order
[55] Wallbridge, Wallbridge also sought an order sealing the notice of motion, the supporting affidavits of Mr. Wallbridge and Mr. Pothier, the minutes of settlement and the judgment. The basis of such a request is solicitor/client privilege and that these matters ought not to be disclosed to the defendants nor to the public.