Anstead v. Canada
Court headnote
Anstead v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2007-02-20 Neutral citation 2007 FCA 77 File numbers A-147-04 Decision Content Date: 20070220 Docket: A-147-04 Citation: 2007 FCA 77 BETWEEN: KEITH ANSTEAD Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] This appeal of a decision of the Tax Court of Canada denying deductions relative to spousal payments was dismissed with costs to the Respondent. 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 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, presented at $1,846.75, is assessed and allowed …
Read full judgment
Anstead v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2007-02-20 Neutral citation 2007 FCA 77 File numbers A-147-04 Decision Content Date: 20070220 Docket: A-147-04 Citation: 2007 FCA 77 BETWEEN: KEITH ANSTEAD Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] This appeal of a decision of the Tax Court of Canada denying deductions relative to spousal payments was dismissed with costs to the Respondent. 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 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, presented at $1,846.75, is assessed and allowed at $2,326.75 (mid-range costs of $480.00 under item 26 for the assessment of costs having been included at the Respondent's request). "Charles E. Stinson" Assessment Officer FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-147-04 STYLE OF CAUSE: KEITH ANSTEAD v. HMQ ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON DATED: February 20, 2007 WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY: n/a FOR THE APPELLANT Robert Gosman FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: n/a FOR THE APPELLANT John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca