Acland & Grohl

In Acland & Grohl, the respondent brought an appeal against the appellant in the Family Court, contesting the costs incurred during the proceedings. The crux of the dispute was the basis on which these costs should be assessed. The respondent sought an order for the payment of her costs on an indemnity basis, while the appellant argued that the costs should be assessed on a party and party basis. The case reached the court with both parties presenting their arguments on the appropriate assessment of costs in light of the appeal's outcome.

The court was required to determine the proper basis for assessing the costs of the appeal. It considered whether the respondent's request for indemnity costs was justified given the circumstances of the case. The court examined the nature of the appeal, noting that it was based on a fundamentally flawed premise and was ultimately doomed to fail. Additionally, the court took into account the appellant's imprudent refusal of an offer of settlement, which further influenced the decision on costs. Given these factors, the court found that the respondent was entitled to indemnity costs.

In light of the court's reasoning, it ordered that the appellant should pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the appeal, fixed at $32,000, within twenty-eight days. The form of the order was subject to the entry of the order in the court's records. This decision underscored the importance of the basis on which costs are assessed in appeals and the potential consequences of imprudent actions during litigation.