TING v TING

Justice Harris considered a Costs Application after the Parties were unable to come to an agreement on Costs at the conclusion of a Trial. Justice Harris noted that the Court is awarded considerable discretion under Rules 10.31 and 10.33 when considering Costs.

After canvassing the jurisprudence, Justice Harris noted that Column 1 of Schedule C is no longer the presumed default for Costs in family law contexts. Ultimately, taking into consideration the complexity of the Trial and interlocutory Applications, Justice Harris awarded the Plaintiff party/party fees based upon Column 3 of Schedule C, plus disbursements and GST; excepting thereout certain disputed fees which were identified by Justice Harris.