Canada v. Turmoil (Ship), 2009 FC 1255

 

Date: 20091208

Docket: T-733-07

Citation: 2009 FC 1255

 

SIMPLIFIED ACTION

ACTION IN REM AND IN PERSONAM

 

BETWEEN:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA

                                                                                                                                              Plaintiff

 

and (in rem):

 

                        THE SHIP “TURMOIL” and THE SHIP “VULKAN”, THEIR

                        OWNERS, SAMSONIA MARITIME LIMITED, AND ALL

                        OTHERS INTERESTED IN THEM

 

and (in Personam):

 

                        SAMSONIA MARITIME LIMITED, AND TERRANCE MACLEAN,

                        SOLE DIRECTOR OF SAMSONIA MARITIME LIMITED

 

Defendants

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – REASONS

 

Willa Doyle

Assessment Officer

 

 

[1]        The plaintiff filed a notice of motion on January 20, 2009 pursuant to Federal Courts Rules 213(1), 298 (3)(a) and 369 requesting the removal of the action from the ambit of the simplified rules of the Federal Courts and other relief.

[2]        The Court (Prothonotary Morneau) issued an Order on February 10, 2009 stating:

 

            “This motion is granted as follows: 1. pursuant to rule 298(3) (a), this action is removed from the ambit of the simplified rules; 2. pursuant to Rule 213(1), summary judgment is granted to the plaintiff in the sum of $3,245.68 for the principal and accrued interest to December 12, 2008 for fees accruing and accrued under the  Fee Schedule  under the Oceans Act; 3. an order in the amount of $500.00 for costs thrown away for the status review forced upon the plaintiff; post-judgment interest as prescribed by the Interest and Administrative Charges Regulations, SOR/96-188; 5.  costs of this action under Column III of the Tariff B go to the plaintiff.”

 

 

[3]        The plaintiff then filed their bill of costs at the registry of the Federal Court in Halifax, Nova Scotia on October 8, 2009.  I received confirmation that the assessment would be done by way of written submissions.  Subsequently, I issued a timetable to both parties regarding service and filing of any supporting material / affidavits as evidence of disbursements, reply and / or rebuttal materials. Within the prescribed time limits the plaintiff served and filed an affidavit of disbursements.  Upon review of the file, no submissions were received from the defendants.

 

[3]        I examined the requested taxable services. I find them reasonable in the circumstances with the exception of the following assessable services claimed;

            B  Motions (T-733-07) Item 5:  preparation of motion to remove action from simplified rules, including materials - two units and Item 5:  preparation of motion for     summary judgment, including materials – two units.

            D Pre-trial and Pre-hearing Procedure Item 15: preparation and filing of written    memorandum and argument on motion to remove action from simplified rules; and    motion for summary judgment – three units.

 

 

[4]        In regard to the above, and as stated in paragraph [1] the plaintiff filed one motion  pursuant to Federal Courts Rules 213(1), 298 (3)(a) and 369 requesting the removal of the action from the ambit of the simplified rules of the Federal Courts and other relief (that being summary judgment).  I see also that, the plaintiff has sought two sets of two units each for item 5.  In light of the fact that only one motion was presented, only the costs of one motion may be sought.  Additionally, the allowable range for item 5 under column III is between a minimum of three to maximum of seven, therefore item 5 is allowed once at three units. Also, similarly, as compensation was provided under item 5 for motion, the request under item 15 is not allowed and is hereby reduced to zero.

 

[5]        The number of assessable service units claimed at fifteen is therefore reduced for the above reasons to an allowed eleven service units changing the requested fees from $1,950.00 to assessed and allowed fees of $1,430.00.  The disbursements are awarded at $560.68 as claimed and established by the sworn affidavit of Esther Ricketts complete with attached exhibits.

 

[6]        The Bill of Costs presented at $2,510.68 is assessed and allowed in the amount of $1,990.68.  A certificate is issued in the Federal Court proceeding for $1,990.68.

                                                                                                           

         

  

 

 

Fredericton, New Brunswick

December 8, 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FEDERAL COURT

 

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

DOCKET:                                          T-733-07

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                         HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA                                                                and (in rem): THE SHIP “TURMOIL” and THE SHIP                                                                    “VULKAN”, THEIR OWNERS, SAMSONIA MARITIME                                                               LIMITED, AND ALL OTHERS INTERESTED IN THEM                                                                    and (in Personam): SAMSONIA MARITIME LIMITED,                                                               AND TERRANCE MACLEAN, SOLE DIRECTOR OF                                                                     SAMSONIA MARITIME LIMITED

 

                                   

 

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

 

 

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS -                    

REASONS BY:                                  Willa Doyle, Assessment Officer

 

                                                                                   

DATED:                                             December 8, 2009

 

 

 

WRITTEN REPRESENTATION BY:

 

 

W. Dean Smith                                  FOR THE PLAINTIFF

 

 

                                                            FOR THE DEFENDANTS

 

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Justice Canada                                FOR THE PLAINTIFF

Halifax, NS                                               

 

Sampson, McDougall                       FOR THE DEFENDANTS

Sydney, NS