Following the dismissal of the applicants' application, the respondents sought costs.
One respondent settled their costs claim, while the other, represented by pro bono counsel, sought substantial indemnity costs due to the applicants' conduct.
The court held that pro bono representation does not preclude a costs award and that ordinary costs rules apply.
The court found the applicants' conduct expanded the litigation but did not rise to the level of reprehensible conduct required for substantial indemnity.
The court awarded partial indemnity costs to the pro bono respondent in the amount of $84,836.79.
