Short answer. You may be ordered to pay. If the court denies the application and finds it was filed without substantial justification, it may require the proponent, or the counsel who advised filing it, or both, to pay the refusing party's reasonable expenses including attorney's fees.

What the law says

If the application is denied and the court finds that it was filed without substantial justification, the court may require the proponent or the counsel advising the filing of the application, or both of them, to pay to the refusing party or deponent the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in opposing the application, including attorney's fees.

Rule 29, Section 1 — Refusal to answer. Read the full provision →

Losing the motion is not automatically costly

The rule sets two conditions, and the first alone is not enough. The application must be denied, and the court must also find that it was filed without substantial justification. A motion that fails on a genuinely arguable point does not answer that description. So the risk attaches to bringing a motion that had no real basis, rather than to bringing one that turned out to be wrong.

Your own lawyer can be exposed

The provision names the counsel advising the filing of the application alongside the proponent, and adds or both of them. That mirrors the exposure running the other way in the same section, where the counsel advising a refusal to answer may be ordered to pay. The pattern is consistent: the rule looks past the party to whoever drove the step, in both directions. This is worth knowing when weighing whether a motion is worth making at all.

What the other side can recover

The amount is the reasonable expenses incurred in opposing the application, including attorney's fees. It is measured by the cost of resisting your motion, not by any wider inconvenience. That symmetry with the granting side — where the recoverable amount is the cost of obtaining the order — shows the design. The section is not trying to punish either party but to place the cost of an unjustified discovery skirmish on whoever caused it.

Weigh it before you file

It helps to remember what the section is for. It gives a proponent a route when a party or deponent refuses to answer on oral examination, and the same procedure is available where a party or witness refuses to answer an interrogatory. The examination may in the meantime be completed on other matters or adjourned, as the proponent prefers, so there is usually a choice about timing. Deciding whether a particular refusal is worth a motion — and whether your grounds are substantial — is a judgment to make with your lawyer.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.