This is a costs decision following a Summary Trial in which the Plaintiff’s claim was dismissed for being statute-barred. The parties re-appeared before the Court to argue costs; the Plaintiff argued party-and-party costs were appropriate and the successful Defendant claimed full indemnity costs.

The Court observed that, notwithstanding that full indemnity costs are specifically contemplated by Rule 10.31(1)(b), recovery on that basis is reserved for “extraordinary circumstances.” The Court considered the factors to determine costs as listed in Rule 10.33 and determined this matter did not raise to the level necessary for an award of full indemnity costs.

Next, the Court turned to the question of Costs awarded on an enhanced scale by adding a multiplier to the Schedule C Tariff of Recoverable Costs. Noting that multiplying Schedule C costs may be appropriate where the value of a dispute exceeds the monetary threshold set out in the Schedule, the Court considered concluded that a 2.5 times multiplier was appropriate.

Finally, the Court considered the Parties’ submissions as to whether costs should be available for the entire Action (which had been initiated in the UK before being stayed) or only the Summary Trial. Noting the foundational requirements set out at Rule 1.2 and concerns regarding judicial efficiency, the Court held that it would be inappropriate to deprive the Defendant of costs for the entire Action simply because it chose to seek summary resolution of what was revealed to be a definitive issue.

Ultimately, the Court awarded costs of the entire Action against the unsuccessful Plaintiff, pursuant to Rule 10.29, deducting for unnecessary steps taken outside the jurisdiction (per Rule 10.2) and steps associated with the Defendant’s counterclaim.