Nunavut Sealink and Supply Inc. v. Angootealuk
Source text
Nunavut Sealink and Supply Inc. v. Angootealuk Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2006-05-17 Neutral citation 2006 FC 615 File numbers T-1710-04 Decision Content Date: 20060517 Docket: T-1710-04 Citation: 2006 FC 615 BE TWEEN: NUNAVUT SEALINK AND SUPPLY INC. Plaintiff and CHARLIE ANGOOTEALUK Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – REASONS MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER [1] This is an assessment of costs pursuant to the judgment by default dated February 13, 2006, on the plaintiff’s motion ex parte. Under the circumstances, I am prepared to proceed with the assessment of its bill of costs based on the proceedings in the record. [2] In light of the criteria set out in subsection 400(3) of the Federal Court Rules, the fees are set in the amount of $1,242.27 ($1,080 x GST/QST) for the following services: items 1 (4 units), 4 (2 units), 25 (1 unit) and 26 (2 units). As this was an action to recover an amount less than $5,000, and as the matter was never contested, I award the minimum number of units provided under column III of Tariff B for each of the services requested. Also, there will be no compensation awarded under item 7 because there was no discovery of documents in this matter within the meaning of section 222 et seq. of the Rules. [3] Disbursements in the amount of $90.23 incurred for photocopying and service fees are approved as requested. [4] For these reasons, the plaintiff’s costs are assessed and allowed in the amount of $1,332.25. A certificate is issued fo…
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
Nunavut Sealink and Supply Inc. v. Angootealuk Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2006-05-17 Neutral citation 2006 FC 615 File numbers T-1710-04 Decision Content Date: 20060517 Docket: T-1710-04 Citation: 2006 FC 615 BE TWEEN: NUNAVUT SEALINK AND SUPPLY INC. Plaintiff and CHARLIE ANGOOTEALUK Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – REASONS MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER [1] This is an assessment of costs pursuant to the judgment by default dated February 13, 2006, on the plaintiff’s motion ex parte. Under the circumstances, I am prepared to proceed with the assessment of its bill of costs based on the proceedings in the record. [2] In light of the criteria set out in subsection 400(3) of the Federal Court Rules, the fees are set in the amount of $1,242.27 ($1,080 x GST/QST) for the following services: items 1 (4 units), 4 (2 units), 25 (1 unit) and 26 (2 units). As this was an action to recover an amount less than $5,000, and as the matter was never contested, I award the minimum number of units provided under column III of Tariff B for each of the services requested. Also, there will be no compensation awarded under item 7 because there was no discovery of documents in this matter within the meaning of section 222 et seq. of the Rules. [3] Disbursements in the amount of $90.23 incurred for photocopying and service fees are approved as requested. [4] For these reasons, the plaintiff’s costs are assessed and allowed in the amount of $1,332.25. A certificate is issued for that amount. Montréal, Quebec, May 17, 2006 “Michelle Lamy” MICHELLE LAMY ASSESSMENT OFFICER Certified true translation Kelley A. Harvey, BCL, LLB FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: T-1710-04 STYLE OF CAUSE: NUNAVUT SEALINK AND SUPPLY INC. v. CHARLIE ANGOOTEALUK ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Montréal, Quebec REASONS OF MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER DATE OF REASONS: May 17, 2006 SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Étude légale Vaillancourt Duguay S.E.N.C.R.L. For the Plaintiff Québec, Quebec
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca