Is a plaintiff's pre-litigation conduct relevant in determining the appropriate costs award?

On the other hand, the case law also reveals instances where the pre‑litigation conduct of the parties has been held to be relevant in determining the appropriate costs award. For instance, in Grealy v. Kuntz, [1994] B.C.J. No. 2232 (S.C.), the plaintiff failed to prove causation and damages in a medical malpractice action, although the defendant doctor had clearly been negligent. Indeed, the court ruled that the defendant's own actions in performing experimental surgery without obtaining proper consent “brought on the action”.