What are the implications of the costs rules in the context of litigation?

Ontario, Canada


The following excerpt is from Houston v. Houston, 2010 ONSC 6247 (CanLII):

In Serra v. Serra,[3] Epstein J.A. provided these overarching comments with respect to costs rules: Modern costs rules are designed to foster three fundamental purposes: (i) to partially indemnify successful litigants for the cost of litigation; (ii) to encourage settlement; and (iii) to discourage and sanction inappropriate behaviour by litigants.

Other Questions


Can the financial situation of the parties be taken into account in determining the amount of a costs award under Rule 24 or Rule 18 of the Family Law Rules? (Ontario, Canada)
Can the financial situation of the parties be taken into account in determining the amount of costs awarded under Rule 24 or Rule 18 of the Family Law Rules? (Ontario, Canada)
Is Rule 14(23) of the Rules of Civil Procedure requiring a party to comply with costs orders? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for indemnifying successful litigants for the cost of litigation? (Ontario, Canada)
What are the implications of the Court of Appeal's decision not to award costs in public-interest litigation? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for imposing costs on a lawyer who has breached Rule 57.07 of the Rules of Civil Procedure? (Ontario, Canada)
Is Rule 2 (2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure sufficient to add a fourth fundamental purpose for costs? (Ontario, Canada)
In what circumstances will the court award costs under Rule 24(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure in a family law case? (Ontario, Canada)
What are the cost consequences of rule 49.10(2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure when a plaintiff is awarded damages in a motor vehicle accident? (Ontario, Canada)
Is a party who makes an offer under Rule 18 of the Rules entitled to costs from the date of the offer? (Ontario, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.