Date: 20001003
Docket: A-714-96
BETWEEN:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant
- and -
DARIO DEPAOLI
Respondent
- and -
Docket: A-720-96
BETWEEN:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant
- and -
SANDRA DEPAOLI
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
P. Pace
Assessment Officer
| [1] This is an Assessment of the Respondents' Costs in both the above styled matters, pursuant to the judgment of the Court dated the 7th of October, 1999. The said judgment provided that the appeals be dismissed, with one set of costs for both proceedings. |
| [2] Mr. Douglas Langley appeared on behalf of the Respondents. No on appeared on behalf of the appellant. |
| [3] The Bill of Costs, as presented, lists the following items: |
| Item |
Column III |
Amount |
|
| 19 |
Memorandum of Fact and Law |
7 |
$700.00 |
| 21 |
Counsel Fee: a) on Motion: Status Review |
3 |
$300.00 |
| 22 |
Counsel Fee: on hearing of appeal a) to first counsel per hour |
15.4 x 3 |
$4,620.00 |
| 25 |
Services after judgment not otherwise specified |
1 |
$100.00 |
The Bill did not include any claim for disbursements.
| [4] In assessing the above mentioned items, I have given consideration to the relevant factors enumerated under Rule 400(3) and I have assessed the items as follows: |
| [5] Item 19, is allowed as claimed. |
| [6] Item 21, is not allowed as costs were not awarded by the Court on the Motion referred too. |
| [7] Item 22 claims 15.4 hours x 3 units for first counsel. On review of the Court record, I have determined that the hearing of both these appeals lasted approximately just over one hour. It was Mr. Langley's contention that the 15.4 hours included preparation time. Item 22 in Tariff B provides for "Counsel fee on hearing of appeal", it does not provide specifically for preparation time. |
| [8] Given that this item constituted a substantial part of this Bill of Costs, Mr. Langley requested that I not finalize this assessment at this time, to allow him the opportunity to research decisions of other assessment officers pertaining to this item specifically. I agreed to allow Mr. Langley some days before I would conclude this assessment. |
| [9] By letter dated the 27th of September, 2000 Mr. Langley advised me that he had not been able to identify any cases that allow an assessment officer a discretion to award preparation time for the appeal over and above the tariff item, in the absence of a specific direction from the Court. And, asking that I complete my assessment of this Bill of Costs. Consequently, item 22 will be allowed at 1.5 hours x 3 units for a total of $450.00. |
| [10] Item 25 is allowed as claimed. |
| [11] Having regard to the foregoing, the Respondents' Bill of Costs has been assessed at $1250.00 for fees plus $87.50 for GST., for a total of $1337.50. A Certificate of Assessment will issue for this amount. |
| P. Pace |
| Assessment Officer |
Toronto, Ontario
October 3, 2000
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
Docket: A-714-95
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant
- and -
DARIO DEPAOLI
Respondent
- and -
Docket: A-720-96
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant
- and -
SANDRA DEPAOLI
Respondent
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: September 20, 2000
PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Toronto, Ontario
| REASONS BY: P. Pace, Assessment Officer |
| DATE OF REASONS: October 3, 2000 |
APPEARANCES:
| No one for the Appellant |
| Douglas Langley for the Respondents |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
M. Judith Sheppard
Department of Justice
Ontario Regional Office
130 King Street West
Suite 3400, Box 36
| Toronto, Ontario |
| M5X 1K6 for the Appellant |
Wilson Vukelich
Barristers & Solicitors
60 Columbia Way, Suite 710
| Markham, Ontario |
L3R 0C9
for the Respondents
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
Date: 20001003
Docket: A-714-96
BETWEEN:
| HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN |
Appellant
| - and - |
| DARIO DEPAOLI |
Respondent
- and -
Docket: A-720-96
BETWEEN:
| HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN |
Appellant
- and -
| SANDRA DEPAOLI |
Respondent
| ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS |