International Longshore and Warehouse Union v. Harris
Court headnote
International Longshore and Warehouse Union v. Harris Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-04-29 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 162 File numbers A-15-00 Decision Content Date: 20020429 Docket: A-15-00, A-290-00 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 162 BETWEEN: INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE AND WAREHOUSE UNION, SHIP AND DOCK FOREMAN, LOCAL 514 Applicant - and - EMPIRE INTERNATIONAL STEVEDORES LTD. and WILLIAM HARRIS Respondents ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] These matters were heard together. The Applicant was awarded costs of the judicial review as against the Respondent, William Harris. The Respondent's solicitor of record responded to notice of the timetable issued for written disposition of the Applicant's bill of costs by noting that he was not involved and had no instructions to act. By virtue of Rules 123 to 126 inclusive, the Respondent has had notice and the assessment shall proceed. [2] The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having proper notice of an assessment of costs and failing to participate, benefiting by an assessment officer abdicating 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, i.e. those outside the authority of the judgment and the tariff. I examined each item claimed in the Applicant's bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. Although th…
Read full judgment
International Longshore and Warehouse Union v. Harris Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-04-29 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 162 File numbers A-15-00 Decision Content Date: 20020429 Docket: A-15-00, A-290-00 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 162 BETWEEN: INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE AND WAREHOUSE UNION, SHIP AND DOCK FOREMAN, LOCAL 514 Applicant - and - EMPIRE INTERNATIONAL STEVEDORES LTD. and WILLIAM HARRIS Respondents ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] These matters were heard together. The Applicant was awarded costs of the judicial review as against the Respondent, William Harris. The Respondent's solicitor of record responded to notice of the timetable issued for written disposition of the Applicant's bill of costs by noting that he was not involved and had no instructions to act. By virtue of Rules 123 to 126 inclusive, the Respondent has had notice and the assessment shall proceed. [2] The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having proper notice of an assessment of costs and failing to participate, benefiting by an assessment officer abdicating 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, i.e. those outside the authority of the judgment and the tariff. I examined each item claimed in the Applicant's bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. Although there are difficulties with the choice of certain fee items, the total amount claimed for fees could be arguable within the limit of the tariff. [3] The Applicant's bill of costs, presented at $5,602.88, is assessed and allowed at $5,602.88 as against the Respondent, William Harris. (Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson" Assessment Officer Vancouver, B.C. April 29, 2002 FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-15-00, A-290-00 STYLE OF CAUSE: INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE AND WAREHOUSE UNION, SHIP AND DOCK FOREMAN, LOCAL 514 Applicant - and - EMPIRE INTERNATIONAL STEVEDORES LTD. and WILLIAM HARRIS Respondents ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES REASONS BY: CHARLES E. STINSON DATED: April 29, 2002 SOLICITORS OF RECORD Lindsey Kenney for Applicant Vancouver, B.C. Ib S. Petersen for Respondent, William Harris Vancouver, B.C.
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca