BETWEEN:
and
and
PUBLIC SERVICE LABOUR RELATIONS BOARD
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Assessment Officer
[1] The Appellant formally abandoned this appeal of a decision of the Federal Court requiring security for costs. The Court dismissed with costs the Appellant's motion for a stay of the Federal Court's decision. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the assessment of the bill of costs of the Respondent, the Treasury Board of Canada (the Respondent), addressing the motion for a stay.
[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. The total amount claimed is generally arguable as reasonable in the circumstances and is allowed as presented at $875.00 plus $240.00 (the minimum counsel fee allowance under item 26 for assessment of costs) for a total of $1,115.00
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-342-06
STYLE OF CAUSE: DR. NOEL AYANGMA v. THE TREASURY BOARD OF CANADA et al.
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS:
n/a
|
FOR THE APPELLANT (self-represented)
|
Mr. Richard E. Fader
|
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
n/a
|
|
John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada |
|