Is a Defendant entitled to disbursement of an abandoned claim?

The Plaintiffs argue that this disbursement is still recoverable, as “the expenditure was reasonable at the time it was made”: Hetu v. Traff, 1999 ABQB 826 at para. 16, 252 A.R. 304. The Defendant says a cost associated with an abandoned claim cannot be reasonable.

The issue of the disbursement cost of an expert not called at trial was recently discussed by Thomas J. in Forsberg v. Naidoo, 2011 ABQB 705 at paras. 19-23. At para. 22 he identified three steps to evaluate an expert who was retained but did not testify: ... I would not have allowed it without a more detailed explanation of why this expert did not give evidence at trial, specifically: 1. the anticipated relevant area of expertise, 2. how that expertise was expected to be relevant for this case, and 3. why that expertise did not prove relevant at trial.