Armoyan v. Armoyan

Armoyan v. Armoyan

Solicitor and client costs were denied as no rare and exceptional misconduct was proven; Tariff C would produce a manifestly unjustly low result and Tariff A would create a windfall, so a lump sum tailored to the case was appropriate; the court assessed reasonable fees at $48,000 (reducing claimed fees by 10%) and apportioned liability by applying 67% pre-Court-of-Appeal and 90% post-Court-of-Appeal conduct, resulting in a lump sum award of $41,000; costs for the security for costs motion were recoverable; the court lacks authority to order payment from the $400,000 posted in the separate MPA proceeding.

Citation
2014 NSSC 403
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Lisa Armoyan; Respondent/applicant: Vrege Armoyan; Designated Authority: Designated Authority
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Family Registration and Enforcement of Foreign Support Orders (iso) / Costs Proceeding After Summary Judgment (post Disposition)
Outcome
Costs awarded to Lisa Armoyan against Vrege Armoyan in the amount of $41,000 payable by December 15, 2014; court declined to order payment from the $400,000 posted as security in the MPA proceeding; successful party's counsel to draft order.
Legal Topics
Interjurisdictional Enforcement, Registration of Foreign Support Orders, Summary Judgment, Security for Costs, Costs Assessment
Source Language
English
Family Law Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws Costs Interjurisdictional Enforcement Registration of Foreign Support Orders Summary Judgment Security for Costs +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lisa Armoyan

Applicant/respondent

Vrege Armoyan

Respondent/applicant

Designated Authority

Designated Authority

Procedural Posture

Family Registration and Enforcement of Foreign Support Orders (iso) / Costs Proceeding After Summary Judgment (post Disposition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate award of costs?
  2. 2 Whether solicitor and client costs are warranted
  3. 3 Whether Tariff C or Tariff A applies or whether a lump sum is required

Ratio Decidendi

Solicitor and client costs were denied as no rare and exceptional misconduct was proven; Tariff C would produce a manifestly unjustly low result and Tariff A would create a windfall, so a lump sum tailored to the case was appropriate; the court assessed reasonable fees at $48,000 (reducing claimed fees by 10%) and apportioned liability by applying 67% pre-Court-of-Appeal and 90% post-Court-of-Appeal conduct, resulting in a lump sum award of $41,000; costs for the security for costs motion were recoverable; the court lacks authority to order payment from the $400,000 posted in the separate MPA proceeding.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to Lisa Armoyan against Vrege Armoyan in the amount of $41,000 payable by December 15, 2014; court declined to order payment from the $400,000 posted as security in the MPA proceeding; successful party's counsel to draft order.

Orders

  • Vrege Armoyan to pay costs to Lisa Armoyan in the lump sum amount of $41,000 payable by December 15, 2014.
  • Costs for the security for costs motion are awarded to Lisa Armoyan as part of the lump sum.