Following the settlement of a family law application regarding custody and mobility, the respondent sought costs on the basis that he was the successful party and had made an informal offer to settle.
The applicant opposed the costs claim, arguing she had proposed a private assessment early on and voluntarily agreed to pay child support.
The court found that neither party could be declared a clear winner and that the respondent's informal offer did not meet the strict requirements of Rule 18.
To encourage the judicious settlement of family disputes, the court ordered that each party bear their own costs.
