The Court ordered each party bear their own costs following judicial review proceedings in which the plaintiff achieved only limited success. Key factors included that the plaintiff's own misconceived and strident submissions to the administrative reviewer substantially contributed to the decision miscarrying, the plaintiff failed on the dominant statutory construction issues at trial, the plaintiff's failure to join the Owners Corporation necessitated an additional hearing day, and there was a practical difference between the relief sought and the relief ultimately granted. The first defendant's conduct as a model litigant, whose legal arguments were mostly vindicated, weighed against an adverse costs order.
The full text is available to signed-in members.