This was a Decision regarding Costs following a family law Trial regarding a divorce Judgment. Her Ladyship noted the considerations set out in Rule 10.33 when making a Costs Award, including: 1) the result of the Action and the degree of success of each party; 2) the amount claimed and the amount recovered; 3) the importance of the issues; 4) the complexity of the Action; 5) the conduct of a party that tended to shorten the Action; and 6) any other relevant matter that might be appropriate.

Madam Justice Richardson determined that Mr. Stockall enjoyed substantially more success at Trial and thus, was entitled to Schedule C Column 3 Costs. In arriving at this conclusion, Her Ladyship found that Ms. Stockall’s conduct added unnecessary length to the Trial, including by  unnecessarily challenging expert evidence and taking positions in her child support claim that had no basis at law.

Mr. Stockall sought double Costs for Trial preparation, each subsequent half day of Trial, and submitting written arguments on Costs. Madam Justice Richardson declined to award double Costs because her Ladyship had already accounted for Ms. Stockall’s misconduct in making a Costs Award. As such, awarding double Costs would effectively have doubly counted Ms. Stockall’s behaviour.

Finally, Mr. Stockall sought Schedule C Column 3 Costs based on the increased tariff of May 2020. As the Trial had taken place before those amendments were in effect, Madam Justice Richardson awarded Costs to Mr. Stockall based on the Schedule C Column 3 rates that were in effect at the time of Trial.