of the controlling minds of the defendant in that case. The court
found the corporation and the manager jointly and severally liable for costs.5 In Mitchell v. Lewis, the Court of Appeal noted that
piercing the corporate veil is not limited to sham corporations
and can also be pierced if those in control expressly direct wrongful things to be done.6
 The defendants in their submissions also reference the
authorities of Petrelli Construction & Renovation Inc. v. Phillips,7
as well as Canadian Affordable Roofing Ltd. v. Law,8 both
authorities in which the court found the individuals personally
liable for costs for having caused the corporate litigant to do
wrongful things and engage in improper conduct.
 In Canadian Affordable Roofing the individual was only
an employee of the corporation and yet the court held that the
person made decisions for the corporation and was its directing
mind. On that basis it held the person liable for costs personally.
In dispensing with the argument the person was only an employee,
the court found he had held himself out as the principal of the
corporation and was therefore personally liable for the costs of
 The defendants submit the actions of both Manny and Joe,
as the directing minds of Marcos, expressly caused Marcos to do
wrongful things and engage in improper conduct, therefore warranting a piercing of the corporate veil. They submit the conduct
amounts to an abuse of process and undermines the fair administration of justice and therefore warrants an order of non-party
costs pursuant to the court’s inherent jurisdiction.
 In opposing costs against a non-party both Manny and Joe
rely on 1318847 Ontario Ltd. v. Laval Tool & Mould Ltd., and
submit the court must be satisfied that the person against whom
costs are claimed is a “person of straw”. The court in Laval Tool
indicated the person of straw test is satisfied if
(a) The non-party has status to bring the action;
(b) The named party is not the true litigant; and
5 Ibid., at para. 81.
6 (2016), 134 O.R. (3d) 524,  O.J. No. 6286, 2016 ONCA 903, at para. 18.
7  O.J. No. 6798, 2016 ONSC 8159 (S.C.J.), at para. 10.
8  O.J. No. 3817, 2008 CarswellOnt 9437 (S.C.J.).
9 Ibid., at paras. 30 and 31.