In a family law proceeding, the court addressed costs following a motion in which a child protection agency sought intervener status regarding a custody and access determination.
The court had previously concluded that the agency lacked a bona fide interest in the matter and had lost its objectivity and professionalism, displaying bias against the mother.
The mother successfully opposed the agency’s request and was entirely successful on the motion.
The court determined that a self‑represented litigant may recover modest compensation for time spent but declined to award an hourly rate equivalent to that of a lawyer.
Costs were fixed based on the mother’s previous hourly earnings plus disbursements.
