Sentences with phrase «award of special costs»

In Johnson v. Pelkey, 1999 B.C.C.A. 348, the Court of Appeal declined to interfere in the trial judge award of special costs against the solicitor and one defendant who supported the will.

The purpose behind awards of special costs were summarized by Judge Walker in Mayer v. Osborne Contracting Ltd., 2011 BCSC 914:

Litigators routinely proceeding to trial with serious allegations, such as undue influence, run the risk of an award of special costs being made against their client, should such allegations be unproved.

The court frequently has found that unsubstantiated allegations of undue influence justified an award of special costs: Benekritis v. Gilbert Estate, [1998] B.C.J. No. 171 (S.C. [In Chambers]-RRB-; Bates v. Finley, 2002 BCSC 159; Kouwenhoven Estate v. Kouwenhoven, 2001 BCSC 1402; Stanton v. Stanton Estate, 2008 BCSC 470; Maddess at para. 74.

Madam Justice Dardi awa4ded special costs against a self represented litigant and summarized the approach to failed allegations of undue influence in estate litigation and an award of special costs in Leung v. Chang, 2014 BCSC 1243:

[19] An award of special costs may be made against a litigant with indigent status in the proceeding: Sahyoun v. Ho, 2015 BCSC 392 at para. 157; Keremelevski v. V.W.R. Capital Corporation, 2013 BCSC 612 at para. 71; Leger v. Metro Vancouver YWCA, 2013 BCSC 2021 at para. 78.

The purpose of an award of special costs is to chastise a litigant.

The term represents a general and all - encompassing expression of the applicable standard for an award of special costs.

Costs should not exceed the court tariff except where reprehensible conduct warrants an award of special costs.

[78] In sum, ICBC's casual disregard for the disclosure rules, especially when reinforced by the October 20, 2015 Court Order, warrants rebuke in the form of an award of special costs.

In Antrobus v Antrobus 2012 BCSC 613, the Court declined an award of special costs but instead ordered costs to be increased under Tariff C of The Rules of Court, rather than at the usual Tariff B.

In Kim v. Hong, 2013 BCSC 2248, Madam Justice Griffin found that deceiving the court, defying Court Orders and conducting aspects of the litigation with an improper motive in order to intimidate, exhaust or financially drain the other party, were sufficient justification for an award of special costs.

Madam Justice Gropper considered the law of special costs in Westsea Construction Ltd. v. 0759553 B.C. Ltd., 2013 BCSC 1352at paras. 27 - 37, where she concurred that the single standard for the awarding of special costs is that the conduct in question properly be categorized as «reprehensible».

The C.L.M. court, therefore, found ample demonstration of exceptional circumstances justifying an award of special costs:

In D'Atri v. Gonzales, 2017 BCSC 1244, Madam Justice Young found that repeatedly breaching the terms of a separation agreement, relying upon incomplete financial disclosure in an application, forcing unnecessary applications, failing to comply with Court Orders, and making false accusations against the claimant's new partner were sufficient justification for an award of special costs against the respondent in that case.

In Antrobus v Antrobus 2012 BCSC 613, the Court declined an award of special costs but instead ordered costs to be increased under Tariff C of... Read more

When one litigant is ordered to pay all or most of the other litigants legal fees it is an award of special costs, and Siemens v Howard 2017 BCSC 1193 is a good summary of when the court will award special costs.

The BC Appeal court in Smithies Holdings Inc. v. RCV Holdings Ltd., 2017 BCCA extensively reviewed the law relating to an award of special costs and held that reprehensible pre litigation conduct should not be included when a judge exercises his or her discretion as to award... Read more

An award of special costs is discretionary.

[T] he single standard for the awarding of special costs is that the conduct in question properly be categorized as «reprehensible».

Accordingly, the standard represented by the word reprehensible, taken in that sense, must represent a general and all encompassing expression of the applicable standard for the award of special costs.