In my opinion, the submission of the plaintiffs that these defendants should bear their own costs rests entirely on financial considerations. The importance that the balance achieved by an award not be upset is of no relevance to these defendants. In Gold v. Gold, the issue of costs was between the plaintiff and the defendant whose family assets were divided. The “balance” related to the equitable division of these assets between the parties. The facts of this case are entirely different. In this case, the successful defendants are not liable to compensate the plaintiffs. The concept of “balancing” the dismissal of the action against them simply does not arise.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.