Mastromonaco v. Canada
Court headnote
Mastromonaco v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-04-29 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 163 File numbers A-801-99 Decision Content Date: 20020429 Docket: A-801-99 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 163 BETWEEN: LINO MASTROMONACO Appellant - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] The Respondent was awarded costs of this appeal. The Appellant did not respond to notice of the timetable issued for written disposition of the Respondent's bill of costs. The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having proper notice of an assessment of costs and choosing not to participate, as was the case here, benefiting by an assessment officer abdicating 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 Respondent's bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. Although there are difficulties with the choice of certain fee items, the total amount claimed for fees could be arguable within the limit of the tariff. [2] The Respondent's bill of costs, presented at $2,600.00, is assessed and allowed at $2,600.00. (Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson" Assessment Officer Vancouver, B.C. April 29, 2002 FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND S…
Read full judgment
Mastromonaco v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-04-29 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 163 File numbers A-801-99 Decision Content Date: 20020429 Docket: A-801-99 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 163 BETWEEN: LINO MASTROMONACO Appellant - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] The Respondent was awarded costs of this appeal. The Appellant did not respond to notice of the timetable issued for written disposition of the Respondent's bill of costs. The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having proper notice of an assessment of costs and choosing not to participate, as was the case here, benefiting by an assessment officer abdicating 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 Respondent's bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. Although there are difficulties with the choice of certain fee items, the total amount claimed for fees could be arguable within the limit of the tariff. [2] The Respondent's bill of costs, presented at $2,600.00, is assessed and allowed at $2,600.00. (Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson" Assessment Officer Vancouver, B.C. April 29, 2002 FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-801-99 STYLE OF CAUSE: LINO MASTROMONACO Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES REASONS BY: CHARLES E. STINSON DATED: April 29, 2002 SOLICITORS OF RECORD Morris Rosenberg for Respondent Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca