Andrew A. Nicolls

This is a costs endorsement following a ten-day family law trial.

The Applicant sought full recovery of legal fees, arguing success on dominant issues (decision-making, parenting time, child support, child's name) and the Respondent's unreasonable conduct, including false allegations.

The Respondent argued for no costs or limited costs, disputing the Applicant's success and her own conduct.

The court found the Applicant was the successful party on the dominant issues and that the Respondent's unreasonable behavior, coupled with the Applicant's offer to settle, justified an award of costs at the higher end of the substantial indemnity scale.

The Respondent was ordered to pay the Applicant $90,000 in costs.

The trial addressed highly contentious issues of decision-making responsibility, parenting time, child support, and the child's surname.

The court found the mother had engaged in alienating behaviour, including false allegations of abuse and flight risk.

The court ordered joint parallel decision-making, with specific areas of final authority for each parent, and an equal 2-2-3 rotating parenting time schedule.

Child support arrears were dismissed, and the child's surname was changed to a hyphenated form including the father's surname, and the father was added to the birth registration.