BETWEEN:
SUPERIOR FILTER RECYCLING INC.
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Assessment Officer
[1] The Court dismissed with costs this appeal of a decision of the Tax Court of Canada to refuse an adjournment sought by the Appellant. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the assessment 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 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. 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 total amount claimed in the bill of costs is generally arguable as reasonable within the limits of the awards of costs. The Respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $3,625.75.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-459-05
STYLE OF CAUSE: SUPERIOR FILTER RECYCLING INC. v. HMQ
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPERANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS:
n/a |
|
Ms. Johanna Russell
|
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
n/a
|
|
John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada |