1Persisting with an appeal that should, on proper consideration made in prospect, have been seen to be hopeless is a sufficient basis to support an award of indemnity costs, without the need to rely on a filed offer from the proceeding at first instance.
2An unrepresented litigant's status may be relevant in a broad way to the exercise of the costs discretion, but it provides no basis to defeat an order for indemnity costs that should otherwise be made where the appeal was wholly without merit.
3The court left open the question whether a filed offer made during the proceeding at first instance can support an indemnity costs order on appeal where no further offer is made after appeal proceedings are instituted.
