Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Justice Mona Lynch determined the appropriate quantum of costs following the dismissal of Ms. Luan's application for judicial review.
   
• Nova Scotia College of Nursing (NSCN) sought costs of $1,000 under Tariff C of the Civil Procedure Rules.
   
• Two motions were argued on May 21, 2026: NSCN's motion to dismiss the judicial review application and its motion to strike a portion of Ms. Luan's affidavit.
   
• NSCN succeeded on the motion to dismiss but was unsuccessful on the motion to strike.
   
• Ms. Luan raised several additional arguments, including allegations that NSCN failed to file the record and engaged in abuse of process.
   
• The court rejected each of Ms. Luan's additional arguments and reduced the costs award below the amount NSCN requested.
   

Facts of the case

This decision addresses costs arising from Ms. Xiaohong "June" Luan's application for judicial review against the Nova Scotia College of Nursing (NSCN), which was dismissed on the NSCN's motion in a decision dated June 8, 2026 (2026 NSSC 177). Two motions were heard together on May 21, 2026: the NSCN's motion to dismiss the judicial review application, and the NSCN's motion to strike a small paragraph of Ms. Luan's affidavit. Both motions were heard in just over half a day. The NSCN was successful on the motion to dismiss but unsuccessful on the motion to strike. The NSCN sought costs of $1,000 based on Tariff C, on the basis that the hearing lasted more than half a day but less than a full day.

Policy and legislative provisions at issue

Costs remain within the discretion of the court under Civil Procedure Rule 77.02(1), which provides that a presiding judge may make any order about costs the judge is satisfied will do justice between the parties. Justice Lynch also referred to Armoyan v. Armoyan, 2013 NSCA 136, for the principle that tariffs are the norm and that a lump sum award requires a reason to depart from them.

Reasoning and analysis

Justice Lynch found nothing in the case warranting a departure from the tariffs. As the successful party on the main motion, the NSCN was entitled to costs, but the court had to account for its lack of success on the motion to strike, which Ms. Luan had not sought costs on but which still bore on the overall costs calculation. The motion to strike was heard before the motion to dismiss, and the NSCN had filed extensive materials in relation to it. In her submissions, Ms. Luan raised several further issues: that the NSCN failed to file the record as required under the Rules, that the NSCN engaged in abuse of process, that the NSCN improperly raised 2016 and 2017 decisions that were not under review, that the NSCN's position was internally inconsistent, and that the motion to strike was brought without reasonable foundation. Justice Lynch rejected each of these submissions. The record was not filed because the motion for directions had been adjourned to the hearing of the dismissal motion, and this was not unreasonable conduct. No abuse of process was found. The 2016 and 2017 decisions were properly considered as background and did not add time or complexity to the proceeding. The alleged inconsistency was, in fact, a quotation from the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal within the NSCN's submissions. While the motion to strike was dismissed, the court did not find it lacked a reasonable foundation. Weighing the time spent on the extensive materials filed for the motion to strike against the NSCN's overall success, Justice Lynch concluded that $1,000 was not the appropriate figure.

Ruling and overall outcome

Justice Lynch directed Ms. Luan to pay costs to the NSCN, reducing the requested amount and fixing the appropriate costs in this matter at $500.00.