What factors will be considered in determining whether to award costs under section 3(1) of the Negligence Act?

The plaintiff submitted Moses v. Kim, 2007 BCSC 1820 at para. 13 [Moses], in which the court set out some of the factors to be considered in determining whether the court should exercise the discretion allowed under s. 3(1): a. the seriousness of the plaintiff’s injuries; b. the difficulties facing the plaintiff in establishing liability; c. the fact that in settlement negotiations the amount offered was substantially below the ultimate amount; d. whether the plaintiff was forced to go to trial to obtain recovery; e. the costs of going to trial; f. the difficulty and length of the trial; g. whether the costs recovery available to the plaintiff, if costs are apportioned according to liability, will bear any reasonable relationship to the party’s costs in obtaining the results achieved; h. the positions taken by the parties at trial, in particular whether the positions taken were appropriate and reasonable in the circumstances; i. whether the defendants made any settlement offers; j. the ultimate result of the trial; and k. whether the plaintiff achieved substantial success that would effectively be defeated if costs were awarded pursuant to section 3(1) of the Negligence Act.