Federal Court Decisions

Date: 20120426

Docket: T-1101-06

Citation: 2012 FC 491

BETWEEN:

            ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]               The Court dismissed with costs this statutory appeal by way of action further to section 30 of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, SC 2000, c 17. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the assessment of the bill of costs of the Defendant. The Plaintiff did not file any materials in response to the Defendant’s materials.

[2]               The Applicant did not file any materials in response to the Respondent’s materials. My view often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant benefiting by having an assessment officer step away from a neutral position to act as the litigant’s advocate in challenging given items in a bill of costs. However, the assessment officer cannot certify unlawful items, i.e. those outside the authority of the judgment and the tariff.

[3]               Although there were items in the bill of costs of the Defendant which might have attracted disagreement, its total amount is generally arguable as reasonable and is allowed as presented at $9,376.11.

“Charles E. Stinson”

Vancouver, BC

April 26, 2012

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          T-1101-06

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          KHETAM THAIHER ZEID v MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:                    CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                                                 April 26, 2012

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: