The formal order of the Federal Court dated August 7, 1967 allowing the appeal of the defendants (judgment reported in [1968] 1 MLJ 24) was silent on the question of the successful appellants entitlement to a refund of the taxed costs paid by the appellants to the respondents in the court below. The respondents having declined to repay these costs, the appellants applied by motion to amend the said formal order of the Federal Court by inserting an additional clause in the order requiring that the respondents should repay the costs paid in the court below. The appellants relied on Order XXIX rule 11, commonly known as the slip rule. The respondents opposed the motion, contending, inter alia, that the order expressed the intention of the court, that there had accordingly been no slip or omission and that the appellants only remedy was to commence fresh proceedings for recovery of the costs paid in the court below. They also contended that some of the costs had been paid in respect of part of the claim for which the appellants had consented to judgment in the court below. The appellants had offered, before the filing of the motion, to reduce that claim by $ 500 in respect of the costs relating to that part of the claim.

In an oral judgment the Federal Court held that it had jurisdiction to amend its own order under Order XXIX rule 11. The order would be amended to provide that the costs paid in the court below, less the sum of $ 500 in respect of the costs on that part of the claim to which the appellants had consented, should be refunded by the respondents to the appellants.

Motion granted.