Difference Between Amounts Claimed and Awarded "Not a Reason for Depriving Costs"
Unreported reasons for judgement were recently provided to me confirming that, where a party receives substantially less at trial than they were seeking, that is not a reason in and of itself to deprive the successful party costs.
In the recent case (Fadai v. Cully) the Plaintiff was injured in a collision and sued for damages. At trial the Plaintiff was awarded damages but these “were substantially lower than he had claimed“. The trial judge initially awarded the Plaintiff only 75% as a result of this. The Court was asked to reconsider and after reviewing Loft v. Nat the Court reconsidered and awarded the Plaintiff full costs. In reaching this decision Mr. Justice Schultes provided the following reasons:
 When I look at the decisions that I have been provided…it is clear that a difference between the amounts claimed and those awarded is not, in itself, a reason for depriving a successful party of their costs.
 A proper allication of the law should lead Mr. Fadai receiving his costs of this trial, and not only the portion of them that I tentatively awarded him.