A party who was actively represented at a hearing and had the opportunity to make submissions on costs cannot later invoke the slip rule or the court's inherent jurisdiction to vary a costs order on the basis that the order was accidental. The slip rule is not available where the question of whether the court would have made the order now sought is a matter upon which a real difference of opinion would exist. Alleged post-judgment impropriety by the successful party does not justify varying a costs order for the purpose of punishing that party.
The full text is available to signed-in members.