C. Vandeputte

Following the settlement of their family law proceeding, the applicant sought $340,000 in costs, arguing substantial success and unreasonable behaviour by the respondent regarding disclosure.

The respondent argued that no costs should be awarded given the compromises involved in the settlement.

The court reviewed the applicable legal principles for awarding costs after a settlement, noting that courts should be slow to award costs in such circumstances.

Finding that success was divided, neither party beat their offers to settle, and there was no bad faith, the court ordered that each party bear their own costs.

The applicant, the common-law spouse of the deceased, sought a declaration of an equal interest in their shared home via constructive trust, and dependency support under the Succession Law Reform Act.

The court granted the constructive trust claim, finding the applicant made significant financial contributions to the home's purchase and upkeep, establishing unjust enrichment.

However, the court dismissed the dependency support claim, ruling it was barred by the six-month limitation period and that the property had already vested in the respondent under the Estates Administration Act.