Following a motion and cross‑motion in a family law dispute involving parenting time, interim child support, interim spousal support, sale of the matrimonial home, and exclusive possession, the respondent sought costs.
Applying Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules, the court considered success, reasonableness of conduct, complexity, and the parties’ reasonable expectations regarding costs.
The court found the responding party was substantially successful on the parenting, support, and exclusive possession issues, and that costs should be awarded on a partial indemnity basis.
While some disclosure delays by the opposing party were noted, the conduct did not justify elevated costs.
Costs were fixed at $8,500 plus HST and disbursements.