The court determined costs following a family law motion concerning the interpretation of a consent divorce order dealing with division of a pension.
The moving party successfully argued that the order required the respondent’s pension to be divided on a “delinked” basis rather than a “linked” basis.
Applying Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules and s. 131(1) of the Courts of Justice Act, the court reaffirmed that the successful party is presumptively entitled to costs, subject to considerations of reasonableness and proportionality.
Although the successful party claimed over $18,000 in costs and more than 80 hours of lawyer time, the court found that amount excessive for the circumstances.
The court fixed costs at $12,500 inclusive of disbursements and HST as a fair and reasonable award.
