|
Civil Litigation - Costs - Adjudged by What Loser Wanted. Shannon v. Hrabovsky
In Shannon v. Hrabovsky (Ont CA, 2024) the Court of Appeal considers a costs issue, here where the court weighs the amount of costs sought by the losing side as a factor in costs awarded:[3] While this is a very large amount, the appellants’ own bill of costs is even higher: they sought over $150,000 in fees and disbursements for themselves, on a partial indemnity basis. Accordingly, they cannot object that the amount sought by the respondent is contrary to their own expectations of what would be fair and reasonable in the circumstances: see Boucher v. Public Accountants Council for the Province of Ontario (2004), 2004 CanLII 14579 (ON CA), 71 O.R. (3d) 291 (C.A.), at para. 38. . Woods v. Timko
In Woods v. Timko (Div Court, 2024) the Divisional Court considered a family law cost award, here influenced by the other side's costs request:[58] The father is entitled to costs of this appeal fixed at $15,000 ( all inclusive), which is a fair, reasonable and proportionate amount, given the complexities in this matter and in light of the fact that the mother was requesting $40,000 had she been successful. . Schuur v Sas
In Schuur v Sas (Div Court, 2023) the Divisional Court reflected a novel costs factor that I've started to observe, that of assessing the quantum of costs to the 'winner', in relation to what the 'loser' requested on their success:[43] The Applicant shall pay costs to Dr. Sas of $10,000, all inclusive, which is the amount she sought had she been successful.
|
