ABDESSEMED v ECKENSVILLER, 2026 ABKB 651

The Applicant sought a lump sum enhanced Costs Award in the amount of $10,000 arising from her post-divorce variation Application concerning child support.

There was no dispute that, as the substantially successful party, the Applicant was entitled to costs pursuant to Rule 10.29. The Applicant argued that enhanced costs were warranted because the Application would have been unnecessary but for the Respondent’s decision to stop paying child support without lawful basis and his refusal to participate in the Child Support Recalculation Program. However, the Applicant did not submit a Bill of Costs as required. Instead, she submitted what she described a “reasonable Schedule C based breakdown”, claiming costs in excess of the tariff amounts prescribed by Schedule C.

The Court considered Rules 10.29 and 10.33, together with the governing principles and jurisprudence respecting Costs Awards. Applying those principles, Justice McGuire held that the Applicant was entitled to costs but concluded that the appropriate Award was the Schedule C tariff rather than the higher amounts claimed in the Applicant’s proposed breakdown. McGuire J. nevertheless found that enhanced costs were justified pursuant to Rule 10.33(2)(g) because of the Respondent’s misconduct.

Accordingly, the Court awarded the Applicant enhanced costs of $2,700, representing twice the applicable Schedule C tariff amount.