John Stagliano, Inc. v. Elmaleh

John Stagliano, Inc. v. Elmaleh
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2006-10-26
Neutral citation
2006 FC 1293
File numbers
T-1779-05
Decision Content
Date: 20061026
Docket: T-1779-05
Citation: 2006 FC 1293
BETWEEN:
JOHN STAGLIANO, INC.,
JULES JORDAN VIDEO, INC.
and ASHLEY GASPER
Plaintiffs
and
ALAIN ELMALEH, JACKY ELKESLASSY,
GERALD OUZZAN, 144942 CANADA INC.
(cob KAYTEL VIDEO DISTRIBUTION),
LEISURE TIME CANADA INC.,
TRANSWORLD SALES AGENCY LTD.,
JACKY'S ONE STOP DISTRIBUTION INC.,
SYLNET DISTRIBUTION INC.,
JOHN DOE, JANE DOE and OTHER PERSONS,
NAMES UNKNOWN, WHO DEAL IN UNAUTHORIZED
OR COUNTERFEIT EA MERCHANDISE
Defendants
and
ALAIN ELMALEH ET 144942 CANADA INC.
(cob KAYTEL VIDEO DISTRIBUTION)
Plaintiffs by Counterclaim
and
JOHN STAGLIANO, INC., JULES JORDAN VIDEO, INC.,
ASHLEY GASPER, SABIN BRUNET ET JACKY ELKESLASSY
Defendants by Counterclaim
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – REASONS
MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER
[1] On June 27, 2006, the defendants Alain Elmaleh and 144942 Canada Inc. filed a bill of costs following the order of the Court dated May 10, 2006, dismissing the defendants’ motion to extend an interlocutory injunction.
[2] In their written representations, counsel for the defendants take the position that the assessment is premature, because the order of May 10, 2006, does not provide that the costs are payable forthwith. This was noted by Prothonotary Morneau in paragraph 6 of his order dated September 14, 2006, following a motion by the defendants for security:
WHEREAS, in addition and most importantly, on May 10, 2006, the Court did not order —despite being invited to do so by counsel for the defendants—that any amount of costs ordered by the Court—under subsection 401(2) of the Rules or on any other basis—be payable forthwith.
[3] In light of the decision in Waterfurnace Inc. v. 803943 Ontario Ltd., [1991] F.C.J. No. 912 (F.C.T.D.), the case law provides that costs awarded on an interlocutory motion are not payable until the Court has ruled on the merits of the action, unless the Court orders otherwise.
[4] In my view, an order under subsection 401(2) of the Federal Courts Rules must be clear, so that the assessment officer has the authority to proceed with assessing the costs. I disagree with the submission of defendants’ counsel that the Court, by implication, ordered the costs to be payable forthwith.
[5] Under the circumstances, the assessment of the defendants’ bill of costs filed on June 27 will not take place at this stage of the proceedings.
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, OCTOBER 26, 2006
Signed: “Michelle Lamy”
MICHELLE LAMY
ASSESSMENT OFFICER
Certified true translation
Mary Jo Egan, LLB
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1779-05
BETWEEN: JOHN STAGLIANO, INC. ET AL.v.
ALAIN ELMALEH ET AL.
WRITTEN ASSESSMENT OF COSTS
PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Montréal, Quebec
REASONS BY MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER
DATED: October 26, 2006
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
HEENAN BLAIKIE LLP
Toronto, Ontario
FOR THE PLAINTIFF
JOHN STAGLIANO INC.
LEGER ROBIC RICHARD LLP
Montréal, Quebec
FOR THE DEFENDANTS
JULES JORDAN VIDEO INC. AND ASHLEY GASPER
SEGAL, LAFOREST
Montréal, Quebec
FOR THE DEFENDANTS
ALAIN ELMALEH AND
144942 CANADA INC.