Chris E. J. Ecclestone

The court previously dismissed the appellants' appeal of a Landlord and Tenant Board order finding that their occupation of a cottage at the respondents' campground was a seasonal lease exempt from the Residential Tenancies Act.

In this costs endorsement, the respondents sought $8,308.89 on a substantial indemnity basis, while the appellants argued for no costs or costs in their favour.

Applying the factors in Rule 57.01, the court awarded the respondents costs fixed at $5,000 on a partial indemnity basis, noting the appellants' reasonable offer to settle costs.

The appellants appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board decision finding that their occupation of a cottage on the respondents' campground was exempt from the Residential Tenancies Act under section 5(a).

The appellants argued that because they paid an annual fee and owned a permanent structure on the lot, the lease was not seasonal.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Board's finding that the lease was seasonal because the respondents prohibited access and shut off utilities outside the permitted open season, making year-round occupation impossible.

Following a successful family law motion for increased parenting time, the court addressed costs.

The moving party had been entirely successful and was found to have acted reasonably in seeking increased access through counsel.

The responding party was found to have behaved unreasonably by secretly recording the moving party and selectively presenting video evidence, resulting in an order requiring full production and transcription of the recordings at her expense.

Considering the factors under Rule 24(11) of the Family Law Rules, the court awarded partial indemnity costs.

The responding party was ordered to pay $6,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST.