Background: Amarpreet Singh was convicted of five counts under two City of Surrey by-laws. He unsuccessfully appealed these convictions through various courts. In January 2024, Singh filed a petition seeking the same relief previously denied, citing non-disclosure and prosecutorial misconduct.

Legal Arguments/Issues: The City of Surrey applied to strike Singh's petition under Rule 9-5(1) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, arguing it was unnecessary, vexatious, and an abuse of process. Justice J. Hughes agreed, finding the petition failed to disclose a claim suitable for a petition and duplicated previous rejected claims.

Costs Determination: The City sought costs against Singh, including uplift costs due to unusual circumstances. Costs are governed by Rule 14-1 of the Rules, with the successful party typically entitled to costs. The City argued that ordinary costs would be grossly inadequate due to Singh's misconduct and abuse of process.

Conclusion: Justice J. Hughes awarded the City of Surrey uplift costs at Scale B under s. 2 of Appendix B of the Rules, recognizing the unusual circumstances and Singh's conduct. The total amount of costs or specific figures was not explicitly stated in the document.