Chief v. Canada (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development)

Chief v. Canada (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2005-06-13
Neutral citation
2005 FC 836
File numbers
T-686-03
Decision Content
Date: 20050613
Docket: T-686-03
Citation: 2005 FC 836
BETWEEN:
ROY LITTLE CHIEF
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT,
HON. ROBERT D. NAULT, PC. MP, AND THE CHIEF AND COUNCIL OF
THE SIKSIKA NATION FROM TIME TO TIME AND CHIEF ADRIAN
STIMSON SR., CHIEF OF THE SIKSIKA NATION, AND MORRIS RUNNING
RABBIT, GERALD SITTING EAGLE, RUTH SCALP LOCK, JANICE DOORE,
KENDALL PANTHER BONE, SCOTTY MANY GUNS, LEONARD GOOD
EAGLE, JASON DOORE, ELDON WEASEL CHILD, CLIFFORD MANY GUNS,
AND DEBBIE SMITH, COUNCILLORS OF THE SIKSIKA NATION ON THEIR
OWN BEHALF AND AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE SIKSIKA NATION
COUNCIL
Respondents
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Charles E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1] The Applicant sought judicial review of a decision discounting complaints concerning a referendum to approve terms of a proposed land claim settlement involving the Siksika Nation. The Court dismissed the application with costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the bill of costs of the Respondents, the Chief and Council of the Siksika Nation from Time to Time and all respondents other than the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Hon. Robert D. Nault, PC. MP (hereafter the "Respondents").
[2] The Applicant did not file any materials in response to the Respondents' materials. Counsel for the Respondents indicated informally that his information from opposing counsel was that he did not have instructions to file anything for the Applicant. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant 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, ie. those outside the authority of the judgment and 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 amended bill of costs is generally arguable within the limits of the award of costs as reasonable in the circumstances of this litigation. The Respondents' amended bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $5,635.40.
(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"
Assessment Officer
Vancouver, BC
June 13, 2005
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-686-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: ROY LITTLE CHIEF
- and -
THE MINISTER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND
NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT and
THE CHIEF AND COUNCIL OF THE SIKSIKA NATION FROM TIME TO TIME et al.
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: June 13, 2005
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Johns, Southward, Glazier, Walton & Margetts for Applicant
Victoria, BC
John H. Sims, Q.C. for Respondent
Deputy Attorney General of Canada Minister of Indian Affairs
and Northern Development
MacPherson Leslie & Tyerman LLP for Respondents
Calgary, AB Chief and Council of the
Siksika Nation et al.