Nominal Damages Do Not Constitute Victory for Claimant in Costs Determination
📌 In brief
In this case, the court decided that receiving nominal damages does not count as winning for the purpose of determining legal costs. The court also refused applications for higher costs.
⚖️ Legal holding
Nominal damages do not constitute a victory for the claimant in determining costs.
📖 Technical summary
The court ruled that nominal damages do not constitute a victory for the claimant in determining costs.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
📄 Read the full judgment⚖️ View on the official court website ↗
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The event was against the claimant when they obtained judgment for nominal damages only.
- Costs should follow the event, and in this case, the event favored the defendant on the negligence claims as no damage was established.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- Claimants cannot automatically receive indemnity costs based on offers better than the result obtained if those offers do not create a clear presumption against the opposing party.
- The form of the letter offering better terms than the final judgment alone does not justify an indemnity costs order.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The court decided that receiving nominal damages does not count as winning for the purpose of determining legal costs.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether obtaining nominal damages counts as a victory for the claimant in legal proceedings.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that nominal damages do not constitute a victory for the claimant, thus the costs should not favour the claimant.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were applied in this decision.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that nominal damages do not represent a substantive victory for the claimant.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, obtaining nominal damages will likely not result in favorable cost determinations.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify any particular evidence or documents that mattered.