Skip to main content
Federal Court of Appeal· 2004

Edgelow v. Canada

2004 FCA 440
GeneralJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Edgelow v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2004-12-22 Neutral citation 2004 FCA 440 File numbers A-499-03 Decision Content Date: 20041222 Docket: A-499-03 Citation: 2004 FCA 440 BETWEEN: SCOTT EDGELOW Appellant - and - THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] This appeal of a decision of the Federal Court striking the Appellant's Statement of Claim was dismissed with costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Respondent's bill of costs. [2] The Appellant did not file any materials in response to the Respondent's materials. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Court Rules, 1998 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 the tariff. I examined each item claimed in the bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. The amount claimed in total in the bill of costs is generally arguable within the limits of the award of costs as reasonable in the circumstances of this litigation. The Respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $886.34. (Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson" Assessment Officer Vancouver, BC December 22, 2004 FEDERAL COUR…

Read full judgment
Edgelow v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2004-12-22
Neutral citation
2004 FCA 440
File numbers
A-499-03
Decision Content
Date: 20041222
Docket: A-499-03
Citation: 2004 FCA 440
BETWEEN:
SCOTT EDGELOW
Appellant
- and -
THE QUEEN IN RIGHT
OF CANADA
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Charles E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1] This appeal of a decision of the Federal Court striking the Appellant's Statement of Claim was dismissed with costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Respondent's bill of costs.
[2] The Appellant did not file any materials in response to the Respondent's materials. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Court Rules, 1998 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 the tariff. I examined each item claimed in the bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. The amount claimed in total in the bill of costs is generally arguable within the limits of the award of costs as reasonable in the circumstances of this litigation. The Respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $886.34.
(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"
Assessment Officer
Vancouver, BC
December 22, 2004
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-499-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: SCOTT EDGELOW
- and -
THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: December 22, 2004
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Morris Rosenberg for Respondent
Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca

Related cases