Following a successful application compelling arbitration and appointment of an arbitrator, the court determined the appropriate costs award.
The moving parties sought substantial indemnity costs relying on a Rule 49 offer to settle.
The court held the offer lacked a meaningful element of compromise and therefore did not justify substantial indemnity costs under Rule 49.10.
Considering the complexity of the proceeding, the parties’ conduct, and the time reasonably required, the court reduced counsel’s claimed hours and awarded costs on a partial indemnity basis.
