MacDonald v. Canada
Court headnote
MacDonald v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-10-03 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 1039 File numbers T-2655-97 Decision Content Date: 20021003 Docket: T-2655-97 Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 1039 BETWEEN: ROGER K. MACDONALD and WILLIAM CAMPBELL Plaintiffs - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] The Court dismissed this action with costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Defendant's bill of costs. The Plaintiffs did not respond. [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 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 for services of counsel which might have attracted disagreement, but the amount claimed in total in the bill of costs is arguable within the limits of the award of costs. The bill of costs of the Defendant is assessed and allowed as presented at $12,822.72. (Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson" Assessment Officer Vancouver, B.C. October 3, 2002 FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AN…
Read full judgment
MacDonald v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-10-03 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 1039 File numbers T-2655-97 Decision Content Date: 20021003 Docket: T-2655-97 Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 1039 BETWEEN: ROGER K. MACDONALD and WILLIAM CAMPBELL Plaintiffs - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] The Court dismissed this action with costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Defendant's bill of costs. The Plaintiffs did not respond. [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 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 for services of counsel which might have attracted disagreement, but the amount claimed in total in the bill of costs is arguable within the limits of the award of costs. The bill of costs of the Defendant is assessed and allowed as presented at $12,822.72. (Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson" Assessment Officer Vancouver, B.C. October 3, 2002 FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: T-2655-97 STYLE OF CAUSE: ROGER K. MACDONALD and WILLIAM CAMPBELL Plaintiffs - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES REASONS BY: CHARLES E. STINSON DATED: October 3, 2002 SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Goldenberg Zimmerman Calgary, Alberta for Plaintiffs Morris Rosenberg for Defendant Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca