Pearman v. Canada

Pearman v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2005-10-12
Neutral citation
2005 FC 1394
File numbers
T-863-04
Decision Content
Date: 101205
Docket: T-863-04
Citation: 2005 FC 1394
BETWEEN:
MR. RICHARD PEARMAN
Plaintiff
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Defendant
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Willa Doyle
Assessment Officer
[1] The plaintiff's statement of claim filed on May 4, 2004 was struck in its entirety with costs to the defendant by Order of the Court July 6, 2004.
[2] Ms. Darlene Lamey, counsel for the defendant, filed her bill of costs July 8, 2005.
[3] July 11, 2005 Ms. Lamey confirmed the disposition of the assessment was to be in writing - without the personal appearance of the parties.
[4] A timetable for written submissions and supporting material was issued.
[5] Prior to beginning the assessment of the bill of costs, I draw counsel's attention to
the March 28, 2005 memorandum from the Honourable Chief Justice Richard and the Honourable Chief Justice Lutfy in regard to the unit value of Federal Courts Rules Tariff Beffective April 1, 2005. It is reproduced here for ease of reference:
FROM: Chief Justice Richard
Chief Justice Lutfy
DATE: March 28, 2005
RE: Tariff B - Unit Value
In accordance with Section 4 of Tariff B, we have caused the unit value of the Tariff to be calculated as follows:
CPI (2004) = 125.4 x 100 = 122.10
CPI (1994) 102.7
The result of the calculation is greater than 120 but less than 130; therefore, the unit value of the Tariff effective April 1, 2005 will be 120.
[6] Since the unit value of the tariff effective April 1, 2005 was established at 120, the amounts in the bill of costs will be adjusted accordingly from 110 to 120 per unit.
[7] The plaintiff did not file any materials in response to the defendant's material.
I examined each item claimed in the defendants' bill of costs to ensure that they were within the guidelines provided in the Federal Courts Rules Tariff B.
[8] Item 5 - Preparation and filing of a contested motion, including materials and responses thereto. The defendant is claiming four units for this item. However, upon my examination of the summary of recorded entries for this file there does not appear to be any related materials filed by the plaintiff. In view of this, it would appear that the motion was uncontested. I therefore allow zero units for this item.
[9] Item 26 - Assessment of costs. In regard to item 26 the range for this item is two - six. The respondent is requesting two units. I allow the two units.
[10] Disbursements are awarded in the amount of $114.52 as they were established by Amy Secord's affidavit and the attached exhibits.
[11] The bill of costs presented at $774.52 is accordingly assessed and allowed in the amount of $ 354.52. A certificate is issued in this Federal Court proceeding for $354.52.
Willa Doyle
Assessment Officer
Fredericton, New Brunswick
October 12, 2005
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-863-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: Mr. Richard Pearman
- and-
Her Majesty the Queen
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS -
REASONS BY: Willa Doyle, Assessment Officer
DATED: October 12, 2005
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
FOR THE PLAINTIFF
Darlene Lamey
Justice Canada FOR THE DEFENDANT
Halifax, NS