What is the effect of disclosing the unarticulated factor that test cases, the determination of novel points of law and the adjudication of matters in the public interest?

By disclosing the unarticulated factor that test cases, the determination of novel points of law, and the adjudication of matters in the public interest have historically been justification for not awarding costs, as I interpret this passage, what Winkler J. is saying is that given that the goals of the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 are access to justice, judicial economy and behaviour modification and given that the legislature has identified test cases, the determination of novel point of law and the adjudication of matters of public interest as possible means to satisfy the goals of access to justice, judicial economy and behaviour modification, it follows that courts should scrutinize the particular class proceeding to determine whether these means were present and, if so, the court should give extra weight to their presence. It seems to me that Cullity J.'s judgment in Joanisse v. Barker, supra, adopts a similar approach.