Murphy v. Canada
Source text
Murphy v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2001-04-23 Neutral citation 2001 FCT 372 File numbers T-1198-00 Decision Content Date: 20010423 Docket: T-1198-00 Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 372 BETWEEN: ROBERT P. MURPHY Plaintiff - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS François Pilon Assessment Officer [1] This party and party assessment of the defendant's costs took place on April 18, 2001 with Mr. Scott McCrossin acting on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen and Mr. Robert Murphy who was self-represented. The Court had struck out the statement of claim with costs on August 24, 2000. [2] Mr. Murphy indicated that he is presently without employment and does not have the means to pay for costs to be assessed against him. While I can sympathize with the plaintiff's difficult situation at present, costs are an integral part of the judicial process. [3] In Solosky v. The Queen [1977] 1 F.C. 663, Mr. Justice Addy, when considering a similar issue, held: "...in deciding whether costs should or should not be awarded against an unsuccessful plaintiff, neither the ability to pay nor the difficulty of collection should be a deciding factor but, on the contrary, the awarding or refusal of costs should be based on the merits of the case." Of course, only Judges have the authority to grant or refuse costs in any matter before the Court. [4] The four items of assessable services are presented by Mr. McCrossin at the lowest level of column III and a…
Read full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
Murphy v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2001-04-23 Neutral citation 2001 FCT 372 File numbers T-1198-00 Decision Content Date: 20010423 Docket: T-1198-00 Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 372 BETWEEN: ROBERT P. MURPHY Plaintiff - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS François Pilon Assessment Officer [1] This party and party assessment of the defendant's costs took place on April 18, 2001 with Mr. Scott McCrossin acting on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen and Mr. Robert Murphy who was self-represented. The Court had struck out the statement of claim with costs on August 24, 2000. [2] Mr. Murphy indicated that he is presently without employment and does not have the means to pay for costs to be assessed against him. While I can sympathize with the plaintiff's difficult situation at present, costs are an integral part of the judicial process. [3] In Solosky v. The Queen [1977] 1 F.C. 663, Mr. Justice Addy, when considering a similar issue, held: "...in deciding whether costs should or should not be awarded against an unsuccessful plaintiff, neither the ability to pay nor the difficulty of collection should be a deciding factor but, on the contrary, the awarding or refusal of costs should be based on the merits of the case." Of course, only Judges have the authority to grant or refuse costs in any matter before the Court. [4] The four items of assessable services are presented by Mr. McCrossin at the lowest level of column III and are accordingly allowed as submitted. I also note that Counsel charged only $0.10 for photocopies instead of the customary $0.25. [5] The defendant's bill of costs is assessed and allowed in the total amount of $1,054.24. "François Pilon" François Pilon Assessment Officer Dated April 23, 2001 at Halifax, Nova Scotia FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD Docket: T-1198-00 Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 372 ROBERT P. MURPHY Plaintiff - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant PLACE AND DATE OF ASSESSMENT: Halifax, Nova Scotia, April 18, 2001 REASONS BY: F. Pilon, Assessment Officer DATE OF REASONS: April 23, 2001 APPEARANCES: Robert Murphy for himself Scott E. McCrossin for the Defendant SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario for the Defendant
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca