This was a Decision regarding Costs following the Dismissal of an Appeal from a Decision of an Applications Judge (the “Appeal”). The Respondent, High Park, was successful in the Appeal. The Applications Judge in the underlying Decision had awarded Costs. However, the Costs Award made by the Applications Judge was not appealed. Accordingly, the Court of King’s Bench declined to reconsider the Costs Award. The Costs Endorsement reviewed in this Decision solely related to the Appeal. High Park argued for partial indemnity Costs based on several factors, including the emergency nature of the Appeal and the significant monetary judgment involved. 420 argued for lower Costs based on Schedule C of the Rules of Court, questioning the justification for High Park's legal fees.

After considering the submissions of both parties, along with Rules 10.31 and 10.33, Justice Sidnell found that awarding Costs based on a percentage of legal costs incurred was not appropriate due to the lack of substantiation provided by High Park. Instead, considering the high stakes of the Appeal for both parties and the work required, Justice Sidnell found it appropriate to award Costs based on Schedule C, for one counsel and two times Column 5 for the appearance at the Appeal, plus GST.