Case Overview:
Halifax Financial Corporation appealed a cost determination order from the Supreme Court of British Columbia. The dispute arose from a failed real estate redevelopment project and centered on the scale of costs payable under a mortgage.

Legal Issues and Arguments:
Halifax argued that the trial judge erred by:

1. Applying foreclosure proceeding principles rather than debt recovery rules.

2. Presuming ordinary costs instead of solicitor and client (indemnity) costs as specified in the mortgage.

3. Placing the burden on Halifax to prove entitlement to indemnity costs.

The respondents, including Edgemont Hollingsworth Heritage Revitalization Corporation, Ryan Deakin, and Daman Lehal, contended that the judge’s approach was appropriate given the mortgage’s discretionary cost clause.

Judgment:
The Court of Appeal dismissed Halifax's appeal, acknowledging the judge’s error in treating ordinary costs as the starting point but finding it did not affect the outcome. The court upheld the order granting Halifax 50% of its solicitor and client costs from May 1, 2022, onwards, totaling $147,438.25.

Key Takeaway:
The court clarified that debt enforcement proceedings did not equate to foreclosure, and judicial discretion under the mortgage allowed a balanced cost assessment. The error in reasoning did not change the final result.