Law360 Canada ( December 11, 2020, 6:54 AM EST) -- Appeal by the defendants Garber and Nealon from trial judgment finding a dock constructed by Nealon at the request of Garber constituted a nuisance, granting a mandatory injunction and awarding the respondent punitive damages. The appellants also sought leave to appeal the costs award. Nealon failed to situate the dock in conformity with the permit obtained. The dock curtailed the respondent Krieser’s use of their neighbouring waterfront and boat. The dock sat squarely in front of the Krieser waterfront and amounted to a physical invasion of their property. The Kriesers, as recreational boaters, could no longer dock their vessel at their own property because of the location of the Garber dock. Garber rejected Krieser’s offer to pay for all the costs of moving the dock and protective boulders. Nealon was convicted of a criminal offence for ignoring the approved plans and building the dock in the wrong place. Krieser then sued Nealon and Garber. The trial judge ordered that Garber and Nealon, jointly and severally, at their expense, remove the dock from its present location. He ordered that Nealon and Garber pay Krieser punitive damages of $100,000 and awarded substantial indemnity costs of $518,000, jointly and severally, against Garber and Nealon, and a further $80,000 in costs solely against Garber....