The applicants sought $430,000 in costs following a successful application regarding a construction dispute.
The respondents argued that a settlement offer they made should limit the applicants' costs to the period before the offer, and that disbursements for online legal research should not be compensable.
The court found that the respondents' non-monetary settlement offer was more favourable than the judgment obtained by the applicants, as it would have led to a faster final determination of the underlying dispute.
Consequently, the applicants' costs were limited to $92,119.92 incurred before the offer.
The court also disallowed the $4,060.18 claimed for online legal research, finding the applicants failed to prove these costs did not fall within standard office overhead.