Michele Blais

The court determined costs following a motion and cross-motion where the applicant's claim for exclusive possession and the respondent's claim for the sale of the home were both dismissed.

The applicant was the more successful party on parenting issues.

The respondent sought costs and a fine against the applicant, alleging bad faith and unreasonableness, including attaching an offer to settle to her affidavit.

The court dismissed the respondent's claims, finding no bad faith and declining to impose a fine for a counsel misstep.

The court awarded the applicant costs of $3,050, reflecting her success on the parenting issues while offsetting the dismissed property motions.

The applicant brought an urgent motion for exclusive possession of a jointly owned home and primary parenting of two children.

The parties were unmarried spouses.

The respondent brought a cross-motion for the immediate sale of the home and shared parenting.

The court dismissed the claim for exclusive possession, finding no statutory or inherent jurisdiction to oust an unmarried joint owner.

The court also dismissed the cross-motion for sale, finding that a forced sale would cause hardship to the children amounting to oppression.

The court granted primary residential care to the applicant with specified parenting time for the respondent.

Following an eight-day family trial concerning custody and parenting time, the successful applicant sought substantial costs after obtaining joint custody and equal shared parenting.

The court considered Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules and the impact of offers to settle under Rule 18(14).

Although the applicant’s offer to settle was more favourable than the trial result and would ordinarily justify full recovery costs after the offer date, the court considered the financial circumstances of both parties and the impact on the children.

Balancing the purposes of costs awards—partial indemnity, encouraging settlement, and discouraging unreasonable litigation—the court reduced the amount sought.

A costs award of $48,000 inclusive of HST and disbursements was ordered.