Background
- The Roy Building Limited filed an application to set aside an arbitrator’s award.
- The court dismissed the application on May 9, 2024, citing no procedural unfairness and awarded costs to Floors Plus.
- Costs disagreement led to written submissions on June 7, 2024.
Issues
- Determining the appropriate costs award and its timing.
Positions
- Floors Plus: Sought $21,626.32 (approx. 60% of total costs $36,043.88).
- The Roy: Argued for costs of $3,000 plus disbursements (total approx. $5,000).
Analysis and Decision
- Civil Procedure Rules govern costs, providing broad judicial discretion (Rule 77.02).
- Tariff A generally applies but The Roy argued for the less generous Tariff C.
- The court found that neither Tariff A nor Tariff C would do justice.
- The application resembled an appeal requiring detailed review, akin to Tariff B principles.
- Decision: Awarded a lump sum of $14,000 to Floors Plus, approximating 40% of their costs.
Key Points
- The case focused on setting aside an arbitration award, ultimately unsuccessful for The Roy.
- Discretion in costs was pivotal, with a nuanced approach beyond strict tariff application.
- The court emphasized fairness, aligning the costs award with appeal-like proceedings.
Final Order: The Roy Building Limited to pay $14,000 to Install-A-Flor Limited (Floors Plus) immediately.
