Schutz J

10.29: General rule for payment of litigation costs
10.33: Court considerations in making costs award
10.36: Assessment of bill of costs
10.37: Appointment for assessment
10.38: Assessment officer’s authority
10.39: Reference to Court
10.40: Absence of person served with notice of appointment for assessment
10.41: Assessment officer’s decision

Case Summary

After delivering Reasons for Judgment, Justice Schutz invited the parties to provide written submissions regarding Costs, which only the Defendant provided. The Defendant had been successful in both its Application for Amendment to its Statement of Defence and its Application for Summary Judgment, and accordingly asserted entitlement to party-party Costs against the Plaintiff. Justice Schutz stated that, pursuant to Rule 10.29(1), a successful party is generally entitled to costs.

Rule 10.33 provides a number of considerations that a Court may take into account in making a costs award. Schutz J. commented that while Costs are discretionary, there are limits to the discretion. Costs cannot be awarded or withheld on legally irrelevant grounds, such as sympathy, wealth or dislike of improper conduct. A judge exercising discretion must similarly give some weight to all legally relevant factors. Taking relevant matters into account, Justice Schutz allowed the Defendant’s fee items, plus reasonable disbursements. If the parties were unable to agree on proper Costs, either could schedule an appointment before an Assessment Officer in accordance with Rules 10.36 to 10.41.

View CanLII Details