The Applicant sought Costs against the Respondent in relation to an Applications Judge’s Decision and the Appeal from that Decision, as well as the Appeal from a separate Applications Judge’s Decision. The Applicant sought a multiplier of three times Column 5 of Schedule C of the Rules. The Respondent argued that the Applicant should not be entitled to any Costs or, in the alternative, that Costs should be calculated under Column 3 of Schedule C with no multiplier.

The Applicant had been entirely successful in all proceedings. It argued that an enhanced Costs Award was appropriate due to the amount of the claim, its success, and the importance of the litigation.

The Court stated the general proposition that the successful Party is entitled to Costs, and that Rule 10.31 confirms that the Court should consider the factors under Rule 10.33 in ordering Costs.

The Court observed that the amounts involved in the claim were large, but may be subject to reductions by a Review Officer. Justice Johnston also noted that the matter was relatively lengthy, but that the issues were not complex (though voluminous materials were involved). The Court raised some concerns with respect to the Applicant’s conduct in regard to the timing of its service of the Appointment under Rule 10.10.

In light of these considerations, the Court ordered Costs in favour of the Applicant under Column 5 of Schedule C of the Rules but, awarded no multiplier.