Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

                                            SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

                                           Citation: Pitchuck v. Tricon, 2004 NSSC 224

 

                                                                                                                                  Date: 20041108

                                                                                                                          Docket: S.H. 147423

                                                                                                                                Registry:  Halifax

 

Between:

                                      Joseph Pitchuck, a minor, by his Litigations Guardian,

                                                 Richard Pitchuck and Wendy Pitchuck

 

                                                                                                                                                Plaintiffs

                                                                            vs.

 

                                         Tricon Global Restaurants (Canada) Inc., a body

                                  corporate, KFCC/Pepsico Holding Ltd., a body corporate

 

                                                                                                                                           Defendants

 

                                                         LIBRARY HEADING

 

Judge:             The Honourable Justice Walter R. E. Goodfellow

 

Heard:                        November 2, 2004 (Chambers), in Halifax, Nova Scotia

 

Subject:                       APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT - CPR 6.08

 

Summary:                   Joseph Pitchuck, now 20, was declared incompetent by order October 24, 2003 arising out of injuries he received when on or about October 14, 1997, while playing with several other children in the loading dock area at the back of the Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant on Herring Cove Road, fell through the loading dock roof to the concrete surface below sustaining serious injuries and frontal lobe brain damage.  Action subject to numerous contingencies and uncertainties.  Damages set at mediation - $4,055,153.00.  Several settlement proposals advanced and Defendants maintained complete denial of liability  and presented no counter offers, but finally agreed to all inclusive $1,200,000.00.  Settlement structured and approved as it was in the best interest of the incompetent.

  

Issue:                          Calculation of fees pursuant to the contingency fee agreement.

 


Result:                        Initial calculations presented were based on percentage of gross settlement and contingency fee agreement set out percentage to be on net recovery.  Necessary to deduct from gross settlement of $1,200,000.00 all disbursements and an amount designated for party and party costs - here $27,000.00 in accordance with Schedule “F” of Costs and Fees Act.  In addition, initial calculations included charging commission on portion of recovery by parents, which was included in the gross settlement.  Court followed Harnish v. Perry Rand Ltd. et al (1994), 134 N.S.R. (2d) 145 and expressed the further view that even if the contingency fee agreement provided for a commission on disbursements and party and party costs, such would not likely be appropriate.

 

 

 

 

            THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT’S DECISION.

                     QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.