Jagjit Singh Bhathal

The applicants, the maternal grandmother and maternal uncle, sought access to the respondent's two children following the death of their mother.

The respondent opposed the application and sought a restraining order, citing the children's trauma and the therapist's recommendation against contact with the maternal family.

After a case conference where the court expressed concerns about the merits of the application, the applicants withdrew their application and consented to the restraining order.

The only remaining issue was costs.

The court awarded costs to the respondent, finding that the applicants had prematurely commenced the court proceeding without waiting for therapeutic reports and had proceeded unreasonably despite clear indications from the respondent's counsel about the children's emotional state and the legal test regarding parental autonomy in grandparent access cases.

Following a last-minute trial adjournment attributed to the respondent, the applicant sought costs thrown away of over $125,000.

The court reviewed the dockets to determine which trial preparation costs were genuinely wasted and would need to be redone.

The court excluded costs related to prior motions and disclosure that remained useful.

Costs thrown away were fixed at $18,000 on a substantial recovery basis, plus $2,000 for the adjournment motion, and $6,780 for disbursements and HST, for a total of $29,040 payable forthwith.

The appellant, an adult daughter, was made a joint account holder by her father with a right of survivorship.

Following the father's death, her siblings commenced litigation because she did not include the joint accounts in the distribution of the estate.

The trial judge applied a presumption of resulting trust and found no evidence that the father intended to gift the accounts to the appellant.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the presumption of resulting trust applied to gratuitous transfers to adult children and that the appellant failed to rebut the presumption on a balance of probabilities.