Evans
J.:
In
considering
the
award
of
costs
in
this
matter
I
have
had
the
benefit
of
written
submissions
from
counsel
for
both
parties,
and
I
have
carefully
considered
the
factors
listed
in
rule
400(3)
of
the
Federal
Court
Rules,
1998
respecting
the
exercise
of
discretion
in
awarding
costs.
While
I
granted
the
application
for
judicial
review,
I
also
found
that
most
of
the
documents
in
dispute
had
been
properly
withheld
from
disclo-
sure
under
the
Access
to
Information
Act
R.S.C.
1985,
c.
A-l.
However,
I
also
accepted
an
argument
advanced
on
behalf
of
the
applicant
on
the
interpretation
of
section
18(d)
of
the
Act,
although
in
the
end
it
did
not
result
in
an
order
for
the
release
of
any
documents.
Some
of
the
provisions
of
the
Act
in
dispute
in
this
case
seem
not
to
have
been
considered
in
previous
litigation,
and
the
issues
raised
by
the
applicant
were
of
considerable
public
interest.
Counsel
for
the
applicant
conducted
himself
throughout
with
the
utmost
professionalism
and
provided
considerable
assistance
to
the
Court.
For
these
reasons,
I
shall
make
no
award
of
costs
to
either
party,
despite
the
fact
that
the
respondent
might
be
said
to
have
achieved
a
greater
degree
of
success
than
the
applicant.
Neither
party
awarded
costs.
Email this Content