L'Hirondelle v. Canada

L'Hirondelle v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2002-10-07
Neutral citation
2002 FCA 368
File numbers
A-596-01
Decision Content
Date: 20021007
Docket: A-596-01
Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 368
BETWEEN:
BERTHA L'HIRONDELLE,
suing on her own behalf and on behalf of
all other members of the Sawridge Band
Plaintiffs / Appellants
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Defendant / Respondent
- and -
NATIVE COUNCIL OF CANADA,
NATIVE COUNCIL OF CANADA (ALBERTA),
NON-STATUS INDIAN ASSOCIATION
OF ALBERTA and NATIVE WOMEN'S
ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
Interveners
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Charles E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1] The Appellants discontinued. The Non-Status Indian Association of Alberta (hereafter, "NSIAA") and Her Majesty the Queen (hereafter, the "Crown") each filed a bill of costs further to Rule 402. I issued a timetable for disposition in writing. The Appellants and NSIAA did not file materials further to the timetable. The Crown argued that costs under item 21(a), to prepare for a motion (never heard) on behalf of NSIAA to strike the appeal or alternatively to expedite it, should be allowed because that preparation time occurred before service of the notice of discontinuance. The Crown asked for costs of the assessment.
Assessment
[2] The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having notice of an assessment of costs and failing to participate, 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 a judgment and the tariff. I examined each item claimed in the bills of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. There were items which might have attracted disagreement, but the amounts claimed in total in the bills of costs may be arguable within the limits of the tariff, i.e. to include settlement discussions or for explaining the implications of discontinuance to the client.
[3] The definition of assessment officer in Rule 2 and the constitution of the Court outlined in section 5 of the Federal Court Act preclude me from assuming jurisdiction under Rule 400(1) to address item 21 preparation in each bill of costs for a motion never heard. However, in the circumstances, the bills of costs of NSIAA and the Crown are assessed and allowed as presented at $779.08 and $490.70 respectively each inclusive of costs of assessment.
(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"
Assessment Officer
DATED at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 7th day of October, 2002
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
APPEAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-596-01
STYLE OF CAUSE: BERTHA L'HIRONDELLE et al.
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN et al.
ASSESSMENT IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS REASONS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: October 7, 2002
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Aird & Berlis for Appellants
Toronto, ON
Catherine Twinn for Appellants
Slave Lake, AB
Morris Rosenberg for Respondent Crown
Deputy A/G of Canada
Lang Michener for Intervener Native Council of Canada
Ottawa, ON
Burnett Duckworth & Palmer for Intervener Non-Status Indian Association of Alberta
Calgary, AB
Field Atkinson Perraton for Intervener Native Council of Canada (Alberta)
Edmonton, AB
Eberts Symes Street & Corbett for Intervener Native Women's Association of Canada
Toronto, ON