The Plaintiffs pursued a $2 million claim against the Estate of a deceased Defendant, alleging fraud and conspiracy. The Defendant's Estate argued that the claims were meritless, and the Court dismissed the Plaintiffs' claims, finding no recovery was possible. The Defendant's Estate sought Costs, citing the complexity of the case, the Plaintiffs' unsuccessful Applications, and the Plaintiffs' rejection of multiple settlement offers.

The Court concluded that, in this case, there was not sufficiently serious misconduct to award solicitor-client costs. However, the circumstances justified a lump sum award equal to a percentage of the Defendant’s solicitor-client costs.

The Court considered the factors under Rule 10.33 and Rule 4.24, including the complexity of the case, the Plaintiffs' unsuccessful claims, and the rejected settlement offers. The Court took note of Rules 4.29(2) and (3), which provide that a Defendant is entitled to double its costs for steps taken in the Action after service of an offer to settle, if the claim that is subject to the offer is dismissed. However, the Court opted not to apply these Rules, finding that they do not apply if the Court makes a lump sum award, instead of assessed costs.

Given the circumstances of the case, the Court awarded 50% of the Defendant's legal fees as a lump sum, reflecting the Plaintiffs' rejection of reasonable settlement offers and the doubling provisions under Rule 4.29. The Court also directed the Defendant's Estate to provide a breakdown of costs for assessment if necessary.