Skip to main content
Federal Court of Appeal· 2007

Hauser v. Canada

2007 FCA 138
GeneralJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Hauser v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2007-04-04 Neutral citation 2007 FCA 138 File numbers A-381-05 Decision Content Date: 20070404 Docket: A-381-05 Citation: 2007 FCA 138 BETWEEN: RAY HAUSER Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] This appeal from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada addressing tax levies associated with the Appellant's status as a resident of Canada was dismissed with costs. 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 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. There were items which might have attracted disagreement, but the total amount claimed in the bill of costs is generally arguable as reasonable within the limits of the award of costs. The Respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $1,890.19. "Charles E. Stinson Asses…

Read full judgment
Hauser v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2007-04-04
Neutral citation
2007 FCA 138
File numbers
A-381-05
Decision Content
Date: 20070404
Docket: A-381-05
Citation: 2007 FCA 138
BETWEEN:
RAY HAUSER
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Charles E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1] This appeal from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada addressing tax levies associated with the Appellant's status as a resident of Canada was dismissed with costs. 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 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. There were items which might have attracted disagreement, but the total amount claimed in the bill of costs is generally arguable as reasonable within the limits of the award of costs. The Respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $1,890.19.
"Charles E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-381-05
STYLE OF CAUSE: RAY HAUSER v. HMQ
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: April 4, 2007
APPEARANCES:
n/a
FOR THE APPELLANT
Steven Leckie
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Binavince & Associates
Ottawa, ON
FOR THE APPELLANT
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
FOR THE RESPONDENT

Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca

Related cases