Following a trial in which the plaintiff recovered $15,000 in damages for breach of contract, the court addressed the issue of costs.
Although the damages awarded fell within the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court, the court considered Rule 57.05(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure and determined that denying costs was not appropriate in the circumstances.
The court found that expert evidence was reasonably required by both parties and that the plaintiff’s claimed disbursements and partial indemnity fees were modest and reasonable.
The defendant’s request for costs was rejected because the plaintiff had succeeded on the central issue of breach of contract.
