Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

                                                                                                                               Date: 20040526

                                                                Docket: A-778-99

                                                                                                                 Citation: 2004 FCA 205

                                                                                                                                            A-778-99

Between :                                                                                                                     (T-1741-90)

                                                        KENNETH WOLOFSKY

                                                                                                                                          Appellant

                                                                           and

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                     Respondent

                                                                                                                                            A-779-99

Between :                                                                                                                     (T-1746-90)

                                                          SYDNEY WOLOFSKY

                                                                                                                                          Appellant

                                                                           and

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                     Respondent

                                                                                                                                            A-777-99

Between :                                                                                                                     (T-1747-90)

                                                           PETER WOLOFSKY

                                                                                                                                          Appellant

                                                                           and

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                     Respondent

                                            ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER

[1]                            On April 30, 2001, this Court allowed the appeals from judgements rendered by Mr. Justice Pinard by which he dismissed the appellants' appeals by way of trial de novo from judgements of the Tax Court of Canada dismissing the appeals against reassessments for their 1971 taxation year. The assessment of the appellants' costs proceeded without the personal appearance of the parties.


[2]                            The only issue before me is whether or not the appellants are entitled to claim double party-and-party costs for all costs incurred after their offer of settlement of May 12, 1997.

[3]                            The appellants rely upon the decision rendered by Mr. Justice Blais in Mediterranean Shipping C. S.A. Geneva v. Sipco Inc., (2001) F.C.J. No. 1676, to support their position.

[4]                            As regards the applicable jurisprudence and the written representations of both parties, I consider that the offer to settle presented in this matter for the 1971 taxation year was clear, unequivocal and contained an ingredient of compromise. In these circumstances, Rule 420 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, has a clear-cut application on the doubling of costs.

[5]                            In consequence, the appellants' bills of costs are taxed as submitted. Certificates of taxation are issued in the amounts of $ 7,085.14 in file A-778-99 and $ 13,787.81 in file T-1741-90. A copy of these reasons is placed in file T-1741-90.

DATED AT MONTREAL, THIS 26TH DAY OF MAY, 2004.

                                                                                              Signed: « Michelle Lamy »     MICHELLE LAMY

                                                                                           ASSESSMENT OFFICER


                                                 FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                           NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

COURT FILE NO.:                                                                         A-778-99

STYLE OF CAUSE:

                                                                                                                                            A-778-99

Between :                                                                                                                     (T-1741-90)

                                                        KENNETH WOLOFSKY

                                                                                                                                          Appellant

                                                                           and

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                     Respondent

                                                                                                                                            A-779-99

Between :                                                                                                                     (T-1746-90)

                                                          SYDNEY WOLOFSKY

                                                                                                                                          Appellant

                                                                           and

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                     Respondent

                                                                                                                                            A-777-99

Between :                                                                                                                     (T-1747-90)

                                                           PETER WOLOFSKY

                                                                                                                                          Appellant

                                                                           and

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                     Respondent


ASSESSMENT IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

PLACE OF TAXATION:                                                           Montreal, Quebec

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS -

REASONS BY:                                                   MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER

DATE OF REASONS:                                                                 MAY 26, 2004


SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg

Montreal, Quebec                                                                  for the Appellants

Morris Rosenberg

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario                                                                     for the Respondent

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.