S.E.D. v. G.S.D. (Costs)

S.E.D. v. G.S.D. (Costs)

Following Gordon v. Goertz the court exercised its discretion and concluded that in this type of relocation/custody matter parties should normally bear their own costs; the father's conduct did not merit a costs award against him, so each party must bear their own costs.

Citation
2002 BCSC 1492
Parties
Plaintiff (mother): S.E.D.; Defendant (father): G.S.D.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Family Law Custody and Relocation / Costs Application Following Rule 18 a Hearing and Relocation Approval
Outcome
Each party to bear their own costs.
Legal Topics
Relocation, Best Interests of the Child, Variation of Custody Orders, Costs Discretion
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Custody Costs Relocation Best Interests of the Child Variation of Custody Orders Costs Discretion

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S.E.D.

Plaintiff (mother)

G.S.D.

Defendant (father)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Custody and Relocation / Costs Application Following Rule 18 a Hearing and Relocation Approval

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the successful party in a custody/relocation dispute is entitled to costs
  2. 2 Whether Gordon v. Goertz requires parties to bear their own costs in relocation/custody proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the father's conduct warranted a costs award against him

Ratio Decidendi

Following Gordon v. Goertz the court exercised its discretion and concluded that in this type of relocation/custody matter parties should normally bear their own costs; the father's conduct did not merit a costs award against him, so each party must bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

Each party to bear their own costs.

Orders

  • Each party shall bear their own costs, including those arising from the adjourned application before Master Scarth on December 7, 2001, and the application to settle costs.