The fact that the dominant, if not overwhelming, focus of the defendant's application is an
order for special costs against counsel is patent from the submissions of the parties as well as from the materials and authorities that each has filed...
[13] The real issue, instead, is who should hear an application for costs, following a mistrial, when the dominant focus of that cost application is an order
for special costs against counsel for the party that caused the mistrial.
A940325, April 26, 1999, Mr. Justice Henderson declined to make any award for costs where the Public Trustee had
asked for special costs payable from the estate, where a novel application had been made and presented to the court that was something akin to a «test case».
With the support of fellow BROKE members Dutton filed his mid-December application for a summary judgment to include dismissal of Kinder Morgan's damage claims and an «Order
for special costs payable by the Plaintiff to the Defendant.»
I note also the Plaintiff's submission, which I consider persuasive, that even a slightly higher
award for special costs or non-pecuniary damages would have resulted in an awarded that exceeded the Defendant's Offer.
Lump sum costs awarded in chambers which amount to special costs may, in the absence of
grounds for special costs, be set aside and replaced with party - and - party costs.
If you feel you need to be indemnified for excessive and unnecessary costs resulting from your spouse's post-separation misdeeds and court tactics, the Family Lawyers at the Vancouver office of MacLean Law are here to help analyze your potential claim
for special costs as we help you to regain control over your case and confidence in the family law system.
[28] Based upon these terms, even if the plaintiff had accepted the Offer to Settle, the defendants nonetheless would have been at liberty to pursue the
plaintiff for special costs.
In Singh v. Bhandar, Unreported, Victoria Registry No. 99/5629, March 15, 2001, Mr. Justice E.R.A. Edwards declined to make an order for any costs to either party, where both parties had sought an
order for special costs.
On September 18, 2015, the Respondent sent an email to the Supreme Court registry asking for a hearing to ask the judge to «reconsider and rescind the order
for special costs».
For the Court of Appeal, Mr. Leon Lam's answer (Mr. Lam represented the condo corporation; not a lawyer) to the application
for special costs was twofold:
The insured obtained judgment against Intact on the coverage issue on a summary trial application and subsequently made an application
for special costs.