{"title":"Incomplete Justice: The Costs of Partial Indemnity","authors":"Adil Abdulla","doi":"10.22329/wyaj.v38.7391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the mid-twentieth century, Ontario abandoned a simple, full indemnity costs rule in favour of a discretionary, partial indemnity costs regime with hundreds of sub-rules. This article argues that this was a mistake. Partial indemnity has no doctrinal, principled, or practical benefits that cannot be incorporated into a full costs regime. Additionally, partial indemnity carries significant costs to access to justice. Instead, this article proposes a costs regime that incorporates the best features of both the old rule and the new regime. In brief, it proposes a full indemnity rule; capped at the losing party’s costs; with exceptions for divided success, impecuniosity, and public interest cases; and discretionary fines for engaging in misconduct or dilatory tactics. Collectively, these rules would advance access to justice more than the existing costs regime.","PeriodicalId":56232,"journal":{"name":"Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22329/wyaj.v38.7391","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the mid-twentieth century, Ontario abandoned a simple, full indemnity costs rule in favour of a discretionary, partial indemnity costs regime with hundreds of sub-rules. This article argues that this was a mistake. Partial indemnity has no doctrinal, principled, or practical benefits that cannot be incorporated into a full costs regime. Additionally, partial indemnity carries significant costs to access to justice. Instead, this article proposes a costs regime that incorporates the best features of both the old rule and the new regime. In brief, it proposes a full indemnity rule; capped at the losing party’s costs; with exceptions for divided success, impecuniosity, and public interest cases; and discretionary fines for engaging in misconduct or dilatory tactics. Collectively, these rules would advance access to justice more than the existing costs regime.