BETWEEN:
and
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Assessment Officer
[1] This appeal, from a decision of the Federal Court granting the Crown's motion for summary judgment and dismissing the underlying action for determination of whether the Appellant's 1995 and 1996 employment income was exempt from income tax pursuant to the Indian Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-5, s. 87, was dismissed with costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Respondent's bill of costs.
[2] The Appellant 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 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, i.e. those outside the authority of the judgment and the tariff. I examined each item claimed in the bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. There were items which might have attracted disagreement, but the amount claimed in total in the bill of costs is generally arguable within the limits of the award of costs as reasonable in the circumstances of this litigation. The Respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $1,782.90.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAME OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-583-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: RACHEL SHILLING
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
| Mr. John Shipley |
|
|
|
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
| Reynolds, Dolgin Ottawa, ON |
|
|
|
|
| Mr. John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|