Transport Lavoie Ltée. v. Canada Post Corp.

Transport Lavoie Ltée. v. Canada Post Corp.
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2002-12-18
Neutral citation
2002 FCT 1313
File numbers
T-2032-98
Decision Content
Date: 20021218
Docket: T-2032-98
Neutral Citation: 2002 FCT 1313
BETWEEN:
TRANSPORT LAVOIE LTÉE
Plaintiff
and
CANADA POST CORPORATION
Defendant
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
DIANNE PERRIER, ASSESSMENT OFFICER
[1] On May 28, 2002, the Honourable Mr. Justice Nadon dismissed the plaintiff's action with costs.
[2] On September 25, 2002, Mr. Jean-François Bienjonetti, counsel for the defendant, filed his bill of costs and asked that it be assessed without personal appearance of the parties.
[3] A letter was sent to the parties setting out a timetable and the parties filed their written submissions as provided. I will now proceed with the assessment of the costs.
[4] In this case, I must first assess the complexity of the file. Marcel Gervais, counsel for the plaintiff, states that the assessment officer should award only the minimum tariff under column 3 of tariff B. He also states that the defendant itself indicated in its written submissions that the facts of this case were "all in all, very simple". The trial lasted two days with three witnesses and one expert witness for the plaintiff and one expert witness for the defendant. The quantum claimed by the plaintiff was $144,009.00. In view of the foregoing, I consider the amounts requested by the defendant in its bill of costs to be reasonable. I therefore allow what was requested with the exception of item 11, in which I reduce the number of hours to 1.05 hours, which represents the duration of the hearing in this proceeding. The same applies to item 14(a), where I reduce the number of hours to 6 hours for the hearing of November 26, 2001, and to 5.5 hours for the hearing of November 27, 2001. The assessed costs are $9,438.95 ($8,206.90 + taxes).
[5] The costs for the services by students-at-law, law clerks or paralegals in the amount of $4,418.50 cannot be allowed since all services were provided by lawyers and are assessed. However, when a service is provided, as it happens, by a student-at-law, it would be assessed at 50% of the amount that would be calculated for a solicitor.
[6] The disbursements in relation to the costs of the presence of a reporter on April 7, 2000, the transcript of Mr. St-Jean's examination, the costs pertaining to the presence of the reporter on March 9, 1999, the transcript of Mr. Alain Larouche's examination, and the costs of service in relation to the various documents filed in the Court record are allowed since these are proved by invoices duly appended to the bill of costs. The amount of $11,978.96 claimed for the expert witness seems reasonable to me, given that under Tariff A 3(4), an amount may be established by contract. A party may pay the expert witness a greater amount for his or her services in preparing to give evidence and giving evidence.
[7] The disbursements in relation to the copies, in the amount of $889.40, cannot be allowed as requested. There certainly were some expenses in this regard, but it is very hard to know whether the photocopies were made at the solicitor's office or at an independent supplier. Furthermore, the receipts appended to the written submissions in reply to the defendant appear to be accounts for fees sent to the client. Consequently, it is very hard to determine the number of photocopies that were made. In the circumstances, I think it is reasonable to allow 50% of the amount requested for photocopy costs. Similar considerations apply to the fax and long-distance call expenses.
[8] The disbursements will therefore be allowed in the amount of $13,629.14.
[9] The costs on a solicitor-and-client basis in the amount of $43,506.00 cannot be allowed since there was no order of the Court to that effect. On the one hand, Rule 407 states that unless the Court orders otherwise, party-and-party costs shall be assessed in accordance with column III of the table to Tariff B. On the other hand, the Court has ruled that the trial judge is the one who has full discretion to award costs on a solicitor-and-client basis, in AGC v. King (docket A-152-00).
[10] In view of the foregoing, the defendant's costs are assessed and allowed in the amount of $23,068.09. A certificate shall issue in that amount.
"Diane Perrier"
Assessment Officer
Québec, Quebec
December 18, 2002
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, C. Tr., LL.L.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 20021218
Docket: T-2032-98
BETWEEN:
TRANSPORT LAVOIE LTÉE
Plaintiff
and
CANADA POST CORPORATION
Defendant
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET NO: T-2032-98
STYLE: TRANSPORT LAVOIE LTÉE
and
CANADA POST CORPORATION
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE
PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Québec, Quebec
REASONS OF DIANE PERRIER, ASSESSMENT OFFICER
DATED: December 18, 2002
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Heenan, Blaikie, Aubut, Advocates for the plaintiff
Québec, Quebec
Brochet, Dussault, Larochelle for the defendant
Sainte-Foy, Quebec