The Respondents had previously been held in Contempt for having failed to complete a Court-ordered audit. Having been jailed for the weekend, the individual Respondent appeared before Justice Devlin and advised of his intention to complete the audit.

This Decision dealt with the Application for Costs by the Applicant in respect of the Contempt proceedings. The Court remarked upon the public policy rationale in favour of indemnifying litigants who have to spend significant amounts simply to enforce prior Court Orders.

The Court therefore granted an award of solicitor-client Costs in favour of the Applicant, but in light of the amount claimed by the Applicant, directed an assessment pursuant to Rule 10.34 to ensure the reasonableness of the Costs asserted.