Darlington v. Moore,

• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Judge: O'Neil
• Neutral Citation: 2016 NSSC 84
• Subject Matter: PRACTICE,FAMILY LAW
• Citation: (2016), 374 N.S.R.(2d) 1 (SC),2016 NSSC 84,374 NSR(2d) 1,(2016), 374 NSR(2d) 1 (SC),374 N.S.R.(2d) 1
• Date: 01 April 2016
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)

Darlington v. Moore (2016), 374 N.S.R.(2d) 1 (SC);

    1178 A.P.R. 1

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. JN.043

Michelle Darlington (applicant) v. David Paul Moore (respondent)

(SFHMCA 068167)

David Moore and Sand, Surf & Sea Limited, a body corporate (plaintiffs) v. Michelle Darlington (defendant)

(Hfx. No. 407388; 2016 NSSC 84)

Indexed As: Darlington v. Moore

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

O'Neil, A.C.J.

April 1, 2016.

Summary:

Ms. Darlington and Mr. Moore separated after a common law relationship. The court rendered three decisions related to the division of the parties' property, child support, spousal support and special expenses for the children (see (2013), 330 N.S.R.(2d) 47; 1046 A.P.R. 47, (2014), 356 N.S.R.(2d) 6; 1126 A.P.R. 6, and (2015), 362 N.S.R.(2d) 7; 1142 A.P.R. 7). There had also been an adjudication of a claim by Sand, Surf and Sea Limited (a company owned and controlled by Mr. Moore) against Ms. Darlington. Ms. Darlington submitted that she had achieved success on most issues. She sought costs in the range of $60,311 to $120,622 exclusive of taxes and disbursements. Ms. Darlington further submitted that 68% of the costs and disbursements should be attributed to the issues of custody and access and consequently, subject to collection through the Maintenance Enforcement Program. Mr. Moore said that no costs should be payable by him because he made a generous offer to settle and he argued that he was successful in part.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court ordered costs payable by Mr. Moore in the amount of $50,000, inclusive of disbursements and HST. Mr. Moore and Sand, Surf and Sea Limited were jointly and severally liable for $50,000. Custody and access were not live issues. However, the court was satisfied that 65% of Ms. Darlington's legal costs, including disbursements, were attributable to that aspect of the litigation pertaining to child and spousal support.

Family Law - Topic 966

Husband and wife - Actions between husband and wife - Practice - Costs - Ms. Darlington and Mr. Moore separated after a common law relationship - The court rendered three decisions related to the division of the parties' property, child support, spousal support and special expenses for the children - There had also been an adjudication of a claim by Sand, Surf and Sea Limited (a company owned and controlled by Mr. Moore) against Ms. Darlington - Ms. Darlington submitted that she had achieved success on most issues - She sought costs in the range of $60,311 to $120,622 exclusive of taxes and disbursements - Ms. Darlington further submitted that 68% of the costs and disbursements should be attributed to the issues of custody and access and consequently, subject to collection through the Maintenance Enforcement Program - Mr. Moore said that no costs should be payable by him because he made a generous offer to settle and he argued that he was successful in part - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court was satisfied that Ms. Darlington was the more successful party - The court also stated that Mr. Moore's conduct in the litigation had been obstructionist and a costs sanction was necessary - Further, any benefit to Mr. Moore that the "offers to settle" could have on the court's decision on costs lapsed and was not revived - Mr. Moore's conduct in subsequent proceedings reinforced a conclusion that he was not prepared to dialogue in an effort to settle the issues before the court - The court ordered costs payable by Mr. Moore in the amount of $50,000, inclusive of disbursements and HST - Mr. Moore and Sand, Surf and Sea Limited were jointly and severally liable for $50,000 - Custody and access were not live issues - However, the court was satisfied that 65% of Ms. Darlington's legal costs, including disbursements, were attributable to that aspect of the litigation pertaining to child and spousal support.

Practice - Topic 7103

Costs - Party and party costs - Special orders - Conduct by party or counsel - [See Family Law - Topic 966 ].

Practice - Topic 7117

Costs - Special orders - Lump sum in lieu of taxed costs - [See Family Law - Topic 966 ].

Practice - Topic 7243

Costs - Party and party costs - Offers to settle - Effect of failure to accept - [See Family Law - Topic 966 ].

Practice - Topic 7248

Costs - Offers to settle - Costs to successful plaintiff - [See Family Law - Topic 966 ].

Counsel:

Peter D. Crowther, for Ms. Darlington;

David P. Moore, self-represented.

This matter was decided by O'Neil, A.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, based on written submissions on costs. O'Neil, A.C.J., delivered the following decision on April 1, 2016.