The Court considered the appropriate Costs Award after dismissing the Plaintiffs’ Application for an Interim and Interlocutory Injunction to prevent the Defendants from compelling the Plaintiffs to vacate premises on which some of the Plaintiffs conducted business (the “Decision”).

The Court awarded full indemnity Costs to the Defendants. The Court noted that Costs Awards are discretionary under Rule 10.31 and the Court may consider the factors in Rule 10.33 when making a Costs Award. The Court noted that solicitor-client Costs may be awarded where one party has engaged in litigation misconduct. In the Decision, the Court found that the Plaintiffs: (1) failed to establish any of the elements required for injunctive relief; (2) brought an Application that was frivolous and vexatious; (3) proceeded in a non diligent and obstructionist manner; (4) filed repetitive and unnecessarily voluminous materials; and (5) flagrantly disregarded Court policy, the Rules, and directions regarding filing timelines.

As a result, the Court found that Schedule C Costs were not appropriate and did not represent an adequate indemnity of the reasonable and proper Costs of the Defendants.