Is bad faith a requirement for a court to order costs against a lawyer?

While in this case it is perhaps unnecessary to say so, I am not sure that it is correct to say that bad faith is not a requirement to order costs against a lawyer. See Young v. Young, 1993 CanLII 34 (SCC), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3 in which McLachlin J. (as she then was) stated: The basic principle on which costs are awarded is as compensation for the successful party, not in order to punish a barrister. Any member of the legal profession might be subject to a compensatory order for costs if it is shown that repetitive and irrelevant material, and excessive motions and applications, characterized the proceedings in which they were involved, and that the lawyer acted in bad faith in encouraging this abuse and delay. It is clear that the courts possess jurisdiction to make such an award, often under statute and, in any event, as part of their inherent jurisdiction to control abuse of process and contempt of court.