Federal Court Decisions

Date: 20050514

Docket: T-2125-04

Citation: 2005 FC 849

BETWEEN:

                                                        BEVERLY SEIVERIGHT

                                                           carrying on business as

                                                           Bev's PETS 'N' GIFTS

                                                                                                                                               Plaintiff

                                                                         - and -

                                             D. & A.'S PET FOOD 'N MORE LTD.

                                                                                                                                           Defendant

                                            ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]                The Plaintiff, a lay litigant, discontinued this action. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Defendant's bill of costs, presented further to Rule 402. I included directions that the Applicant should address my jurisdiction relative to Rules 402 and 407 and the Column IV claims in the bill of costs. The Defendant filed an amended bill of costs claiming Column III costs and argued further to Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd. v. Philipp Brothers Far East Inc. [1987] F.C.J. No. 379 (T.O.) that a party may amend its bill of costs.

[2]                The Plaintiff did not file any materials in response to the Defendant's materials. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant benefiting by an assessment officer stepping away from a position of neutrality to act as the litigant's advocate in challenging given items in a bill of costs. However, the assessment officer cannot certify unlawful items, ie. those outside the authority of the judgment and tariff. I examined each item claimed in the amended bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. There were items for services of counsel which might have attracted disagreement, but the amount claimed in total in the amended bill of costs is generally arguable within the limits of the tariff as reasonable in the circumstances of this litigation. The Defendant is correct: a bill of costs may be amended as long as the opposing party has sufficient opportunity to respond to the changes. The Defendant's amended bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $2,354.16.

(Sgd. ) "Charles E. Stinson"

     Assessment Officer

Vancouver, BC

June 14, 2005

                                                             FEDERAL COURT

                            NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          T-2125-04

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          BEVERLY SEIVERIGHT carrying on business as

                                                            Bev's PETS 'N' GIFTS

- and -

D. & A.'S PET FOOD 'N MORE LTD.

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:                     CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                                                  June 14, 2005

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Oyen Wiggs Green & Mutala LLP       for Defendant

Vancouver, BC