Following the dismissal of the applicant's property claim, the respondent parties sought costs on a substantial indemnity basis.
The court reviewed the factors under Rule 57.01, noting the applicant's conduct unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings and complicated a simple contractual dispute.
However, the court declined to award substantial indemnity costs, finding the settlement offers did not trigger Rule 49.10 consequences.
The court reduced the requested amounts due to duplication of effort, excessive use of senior counsel, and unreasonable refusal of a settlement offer by one respondent, awarding total costs of $47,500 across the three respondents.
