Jurak v. Canada
Court headnote
Jurak v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2006-01-19 Neutral citation 2006 FCA 24 File numbers A-22-02 Decision Content Date: 20060119 Docket: A-22-02 Citation: 2006 FCA 24 BETWEEN: ANTHONY JURAK Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER [1] This is an assessment of costs following a judgment dated February 3, 2003. On October 18, 2005, we sent a letter to the appellant requiring him to file his written submissions against the respondent's bill of costs. To date, there has not been a reply to our request. [2] In the circumstances, with the exception of item 26, the bill of costs is assessed as submitted since all of the claims are reasonable and consistent with the application of Tariff B in general. I am awarding 2 units for the assessment of costs since this is a very simple matter and is not contested. Note that the fees are calculated according to the value of the unit, which has been $120 since April 1, 2005. [3] A certificate of assessment is therefore issued in the amount of $1,515.85. Signed: "Michelle Lamy" MICHELLE LAMY ASSESSMENT OFFICER MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC January 19, 2006 Certified true translation Francie Gow FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-22-02 STYLE OF CAUSE: Anthony Jurak v. Her Majesty the Queen ASSESSMENT OF COSTS WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Montréal, Quebec REASONS OF MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER DATED: January…
Read full judgment
Jurak v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2006-01-19 Neutral citation 2006 FCA 24 File numbers A-22-02 Decision Content Date: 20060119 Docket: A-22-02 Citation: 2006 FCA 24 BETWEEN: ANTHONY JURAK Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER [1] This is an assessment of costs following a judgment dated February 3, 2003. On October 18, 2005, we sent a letter to the appellant requiring him to file his written submissions against the respondent's bill of costs. To date, there has not been a reply to our request. [2] In the circumstances, with the exception of item 26, the bill of costs is assessed as submitted since all of the claims are reasonable and consistent with the application of Tariff B in general. I am awarding 2 units for the assessment of costs since this is a very simple matter and is not contested. Note that the fees are calculated according to the value of the unit, which has been $120 since April 1, 2005. [3] A certificate of assessment is therefore issued in the amount of $1,515.85. Signed: "Michelle Lamy" MICHELLE LAMY ASSESSMENT OFFICER MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC January 19, 2006 Certified true translation Francie Gow FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-22-02 STYLE OF CAUSE: Anthony Jurak v. Her Majesty the Queen ASSESSMENT OF COSTS WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Montréal, Quebec REASONS OF MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER DATED: January 19, 2006 SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Mendelsohn Rosentzveig Shacter FOR THE APPELLANT John H. Sims, Q.C. Montréal, Quebec FOR THE RESPONDENT
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca