Bakht v. Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development)
Court headnote
Bakht v. Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2004-06-09 Neutral citation 2004 FCA 225 File numbers A-226-01 Decision Content Date: 20040609 Docket: A-226-01 Citation: 2004 FCA 225 BETWEEN: Dr. Kazi K. Bakht Applicant -and- Minister of Human Resources Development, Canada Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS FRANÇOIS PILON Assessment Officer [1] This application for judicial review was dismissed with costs on June 13, 2002. Ms. Ingrid Abbott, Paralegal with the Respondent, filed the bill of costs on May 7, 2004 and requested that it be assessed without the personal appearance of parties. [2] The Applicant's written submissions filed in response appear to be a reiteration of his legal arguments on the merits of the case before the Court of Appeal. Dr. Bakht enclosed various excerpts from the Income Tax Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act, but these are not relevant to an assessment of costs. His main argument seems to be that he should not have to pay costs. Rule 400 (1) provides that: "The Court shall have full discretionary power over the amount and allocation of costs and the determination of by whom they are to be paid." The assessment officer has no discretion in this matter. [3] Under item 5 the Respondent claims three units for its response to a motion filed by the Applicant. The Order of the Court dated August 27, 2001 is silent as to costs; this item will therefore be deleted from the bill of cos…
Read full judgment
Bakht v. Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2004-06-09 Neutral citation 2004 FCA 225 File numbers A-226-01 Decision Content Date: 20040609 Docket: A-226-01 Citation: 2004 FCA 225 BETWEEN: Dr. Kazi K. Bakht Applicant -and- Minister of Human Resources Development, Canada Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS FRANÇOIS PILON Assessment Officer [1] This application for judicial review was dismissed with costs on June 13, 2002. Ms. Ingrid Abbott, Paralegal with the Respondent, filed the bill of costs on May 7, 2004 and requested that it be assessed without the personal appearance of parties. [2] The Applicant's written submissions filed in response appear to be a reiteration of his legal arguments on the merits of the case before the Court of Appeal. Dr. Bakht enclosed various excerpts from the Income Tax Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act, but these are not relevant to an assessment of costs. His main argument seems to be that he should not have to pay costs. Rule 400 (1) provides that: "The Court shall have full discretionary power over the amount and allocation of costs and the determination of by whom they are to be paid." The assessment officer has no discretion in this matter. [3] Under item 5 the Respondent claims three units for its response to a motion filed by the Applicant. The Order of the Court dated August 27, 2001 is silent as to costs; this item will therefore be deleted from the bill of costs. [4] Assessable services under items 2, 13, 14, 25 and 26 are presented at a medium level of units. They are allowed as requested. [5] The bill of costs of the Respondent is assessed and allowed in the amounts of $1,650.00 for fees and $42.00 for disbursements. A certificate of assessment will issue in the amount of $1,692.00. Halifax, Nova Scotia June 9, 2004 François Pilon Assessment Officer FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-226-01 STYLE OF CAUSE: DR. KAZI K. BAKHT Applicant -and- MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, CANADA Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Halifax, Nova Scotia ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS BY: FRANÇOIS PILON, ASSESSMENT OFFICER DATED: June 9, 2004 SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General Ottawa, Ontario for the Respondent
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca