Additional Costs Awarded – Verjee Law

*Further Developments*

In a previous post, we shared Zul Verjee K.C. and Nick Austin’s success before Justice Labrenz in his decision, Baker Law Firm v Colors Unlimited Inc., 2024 ABKB 53. In that decision, Mr. Verjee, K.C. and Mr. Austin successfully resisted the plaintiff’s application to compel disclosure of a settlement agreement, a solicitor’s file, and other privileged materials from the various defendants, and other non-party respondents. Justice Labrenz recently issued a second decision in this matter in relation to costs, which remained disputed by the parties and necessitated further arguments.

In Justice Labrenz’ latest decision, Baker Law Firm v Colors Unlimited Inc, 2024 ABKB 241, Mr. Verjee, K.C., and Mr. Austin obtained costs for their clients in relation to the underlying appeal on a full indemnity, solicitor/client basis (or alternately, Schedule C, Column 3 costs multiplied by five). In his decision, Justice Labrenz highlights the various current considerations informing costs awards in Alberta, and recent developments in the law following the landmark decision in McAllister v Calgary (City), 2021 ABCA 21. Specifically, Justice Labrenz highlights the potentially adverse costs consequences to parties who fail to establish allegations of fraud and other dishonest conduct. The decision further confirms that the prescribed costs amounts as set out in Schedule C of the Rules of Court are often insufficient to account for the realities of modern litigation, and often warrant some manner of multiplier to properly indemnify the successful party. Verjee Law will post a link to the decision when it is published online.