Is a lawyer personally liable for costs in a personal injury action?

The case law is clear that an order that costs be payable personally against a lawyer are to be sparingly made. The leading case is Young v. Young, 1993 CanLII 34 (SCC), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3, where McLachlin J. (as she then was) said, at p. 135-136: The Court of Appeal held that no order for costs should have been made against Mr. How. There is no need to repeat that entirely satisfactory analysis. 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. But the fault that might give rise to a costs award against Mr. How does not characterize these proceedings, despite their great length and acrimonious progress. Moreover, courts must be extremely cautious in awarding costs personally against a lawyer, given the duties upon a lawyer to guard confidentiality of instructions and to bring forward with courage even unpopular causes. A lawyer should not be placed in a situation where his or her fear of an adverse order of costs may conflict with these fundamental duties of his or her calling. [emphasis in original]