Following the resolution of an application challenging a regulation after the respondents agreed to amend it, the court determined the appropriate quantum of costs payable to the applicants.
The applicants sought costs on a substantial indemnity basis, arguing the litigation involved costs thrown away and abusive conduct by the respondents.
The court rejected both arguments, holding the matter resembled a typical settlement scenario and that the respondents had not acted unreasonably.
The court also rejected requests to exclude negotiation time and expert-related costs from the applicants’ bill of costs, but found the total amount claimed excessive.
Applying the factors under Rule 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court awarded reduced costs on a partial indemnity basis.
