The applicant brought a motion for costs against the appellant after the appellant withdrew his appeal of a zoning by-law amendment.
The applicant sought costs on a substantial indemnity basis, alleging the appellant lacked promptness in communications.
The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding the appellant's conduct was reasonable, well-intentioned, and fell well short of the threshold for a costs award under Rule 23.9.
The Tribunal noted that costs should not be used as a threat to deter public participation in planning processes.
