Canada Case Law

Watts v. The King

Court

Tax Court of Canada

Enhanced costs of $30,000 were awarded because the Appellant brought three unsuccessful and meritless motions that materially increased the volume, complexity and duration of the proceedings; the Respondent was entirely successful and provided evidence of 395.41 hours and $99,810.92 in solicitor-client costs, and the Court found the lump sum claimed to be reasonable in light of the subsection 147(3) factors.

Source excerpt

• Section 160 income tax act
• Costs - enhanced costs beyond tariff
• Charter challenges to search warrants
• Res judicata and issue estoppel
• Search and seizure legality

Read case analysis

Tri-X Excavating Ltd. v . Morman

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court awarded the plaintiff its costs and double costs from April 19, 2018, holding the defendants unreasonably refused a reasonable settlement offer.

• Builders' lien
• Offer to settle
• Double costs
• Disclosure
• Self-representation
• Causation

Read case analysis

R.A.V. v. J.M.M.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held that success on the child-support review was mixed and ordered each party to bear their own costs. The respondent’s offer to settle did not change that result.

• Retroactive child support
• Set-off child support
• Section 7 expenses
• Offers to settle and costs
• Mediation
• Financial disclosure of third parties

Read case analysis

Mothe v. Silva

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

In a costs ruling after a personal injury trial, the court awarded the plaintiff $14,000 in costs and allowed expert-report disbursements, refusing apportionment.

• Damages
• Costs and disbursements
• Apportionment of costs
• Expert evidence
• Offers to settle
• Court rules interpretation

Read case analysis

G.G. v. M.A.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

La Cour a confirmé sa décision sur les dépens : le demandeur, partie substantiellement gagnante, reçoit les dépens de l’instance au tarif B.

• Marriage agreement enforceability
• Reapportionment under family relations act s.65
• Custody and shared parenting
• Credibility findings
• Offers to settle compliance with rule 11-1(1)(c)
• Costs scale b

Read case analysis

Edwards v. BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court declined special costs against the plaintiffs, but ordered costs at scale to December 8, 2009 and double costs after a settlement offer.

• Costs
• Special costs
• Offers to settle
• Settlement offers under rule 37(b)
• Client account agreement
• Margin calls

Read case analysis

Loewe Estate (Re)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found on the evidence that the patient was incapable of managing his person and affairs and that, had he not died, the Bopfingers should have been appointed joint committees because they had acted in the patient's best interests over many years; the January 2, 2008 power of attorney executed in favour of Dwayn was not proven to be valid given lack of independent evidence and contemporaneous medical opinions indicating incapacity; the unilateral move was not in the patient's best interests and expenses for that move are not recoverable from the estate except for $725.93 for medical s…

Source excerpt

• Declaration of incapacity
• Appointment of committee of person and estate
• Validity and revocation of power of attorney
• Best interests standard
• Costs allocation in estate litigation

Read case analysis

Olive Hospitality Inc. v. Woo

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Costs ruling after appeal: the plaintiffs remained substantially successful, so they received trial costs on Scale B. Special costs and Scale C were refused.

• Defamation
• Breach of fiduciary duty
• Unlawful interference with business
• Punitive damages
• Special costs
• Costs apportionment

Read case analysis

Mowat v. Canadian Armed Forces

Court

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

The Tribunal, applying s.53(2)(c) CHRA and using Federal Court Tariff B as a guide, assessed and reduced the claimed units and disbursements, applied a unit value of $120 to 359 counsel units (equating to $43,080 for counsel) and allowed selected disbursements, resulting in a total costs award of $47,000 to the complainant with interest from the date of the decision under Rule 9(12)(a).

Source excerpt

• Sexual harassment
• Discrimination
• Harassment
• Retaliation
• Costs and legal expenses
• Jurisdiction to award costs

Read case analysis

Ayr Motor Express Inc v. Mckay

Court

Federal Court

Costs assessment in a judicial review matter. The Assessment Officer applied Tariff B at 120 per unit, reduced claimed units from 21.6 to 15, and allowed $1,899.97.

• Unjust dismissal
• Tariff b
• Bill of costs
• Assessment of costs
• Judicial review
• Assessment-of-costs

Read case analysis