The Court of King’s Bench of Alberta has directed the provincial and federal NDP to pay former United Conservative Party candidate Caylan Ford (Calgary-Mountain View) $22,680 in costs incurred in the process for her defamation case. Court of King’s Bench of Alberta Justice Corina Dario found a multiplier of two is the minimum number appropriate in these circumstances. “Given the Alberta NDP’s reneging on its agreement before the Applications Judge, the individual Plaintiff has been put to considerable unnecessary delay and expense in resolving this matter,” said Dario in a ruling. “The evidence before this court supports the Plaintiff’s position regarding her efforts to find an amicable resolution, which was not responded to, and certainly not reciprocated by either party.” The Alberta UCP saw Ford as a star candidate in the 2019 election, as she was recruited by former premier Jason Kenney to run in Calgary-Mountain View. .EXCLUSIVE: How a Conservative candidate worked with the NDP to bring down star UCP candidate.Canadian political operative Karim Jivraj destroyed her candidacy by planting false stories about her in Press Progress. Edited parts of private philosophical conversations involving her were given to Press Progress, with the Alberta NDP saying she was a white supremacist.She ended up resigning her candidacy to avoid becoming a distraction to the UCP’s campaign.The Court of King’s Bench of Alberta ruled in March the provincial NDP does not have legal capacity for the defamation lawsuit brought against it by Ford. .Court says Alberta NDP does not exist.She had filed a $7.65 million defamation lawsuit against the NDP, Jivraj, and 12 other people and organizations for smearing her as a white supremacist during the 2019 Alberta election.“For years, the Alberta NDP has escaped legal accountably,” she said. .The parties agreed Ford was successful in the proceedings related to the Alberta NDP’s legal standing and that she was entitled to costs. Dario said the remaining questions are the amount of costs and against who they should be awarded. Ford enclosed a bill of costs for all billed steps taken to contest the federal NDP’s application to strike or summarily dismiss her claim against it. She claimed Schedule C costs on Column Five with a multiplier of two for a total amount of $22,680. Schedule C is a part of the Alberta Rules of Court that lists legal fees and assigns a monetary value to each step in a legal action. Column Five applies to cases with a potential total damage of $1.5 million or more. The provincial and federal NDP said they were OK with this approach, and the latter asserted Column Five was acceptable. Although the federal NDP had advocated for costs related to its legal meetings before the applications judge when it was receiving money, it conceded Schedule C remains the presumptive default position on costs awards. The Alberta NDP asserted it was not a formal party to the case about its legal standing and that costs should not be awarded against it. While Ford had argued the Alberta NDP did not have standing to make submissions or participate in the proceedings, it had done so. It did not follow through in providing the name of its proposed representative until several months after the hearing before the applications judge and prior to the one before Dario. She said it does not appear an indemnification agreement was ever put in place and was not provided to Ford to verify its appropriateness if it existed. The Western Standard learned in June the Alberta NDP had selected Executive Director Garett Spelliscy as its litigation representative in Ford’s defamation case..Alberta NDP names executive director as litigation rep in Caylan Ford’s case .“The Defendant, Garett Spelliscy (‘Spelliscy’) is an individual resident to Edmonton, Alberta, and is appointed as the litigation representative for the Alberta New Democratic Party, also known as Alberta’s NDP and Alberta’s New Democratic Party (collectively, the ‘NDP’) in accordance with the April 24, 2024 Order of the Honourable Madam Justice [Corina] Dario,” said her lawyer Richard E. Harrison. Harrison said Spelliscy was acting in his capacity as an employee for the NDP. He added he was acting in the course of his employment and with its full knowledge and consent. The Alberta NDP argued the issues involving it were minor when compared to those involving the federal NDP and did not contribute much to Ford’s total costs. However, Dario said this ignores the genesis of this matter being the difficulty in determining how to name it as a defendant in her lawsuit due to its lack of legal standing. Despite the Alberta NDP suggesting it required time to reorganize its structure and ensure funds and an indemnity agreement had been backed by board members, she said there “is no indication it took any meaningful steps to do so even a year and a half after the original application before me and two years after appearing before the Applications Judge.” She rejected the assertion the Alberta NDP did not contribute much to her total costs. In this case, the federal NDP acknowledged it is liable to Ford for costs, but it argued its liability should be limited. It contended no costs should be payable for the summary dismissal application because she took no position on that application. She noted the application took no position because it was to obtain the court's advice and direction on which party should be named. The Court of King's Bench of Alberta found the federal NDP would not be released from this case. Dario said the issue parsing advocated by the federal NDP is unhelpful in these circumstances. The whole of the proceedings arose because of the difficulty in naming the proper defendant. Moreover, she said she was concerned the Alberta NDP informed the applications judge an agreement had been reached that forestalled the need for a decision, but it went back on it. Because of this, she said it engaged in a form of litigation misconduct. Dario concluded by saying costs will be borne jointly and severally by the Alberta NDP as represented by Spelliscy and the federal NDP. Meanwhile, she recognized the federal NDP’s argument it should not be responsible for the Alberta NDP’s conduct. “In my view, joint and several liability for the costs award is appropriate in these circumstances,” she said.
