Miller v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 FC 504

Date: 20110429

Docket: T-964-09

Citation: 2011 FC 504

BETWEEN:

            ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]               The Court dismissed with costs to the Respondent this application for judicial review of a decision by the Appeal Division of the National Parole Board concerning revocation of day parole. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the assessment of the bill of costs of the Respondent.

[2]               The Applicant did not file any materials in response to the Respondent’s materials. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant benefiting by having an assessment officer step away from a neutral position 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.

[3]               Although there were items in the bill of costs of the Respondent which might have attracted disagreement, its total amount is generally arguable as reasonable within the limits of the award of costs and is allowed at $2,786.61, including $360 for the assessment of costs.

“Charles E. Stinson”

Vancouver, BC

April 29, 2011

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          T-964-09

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          DOUGLAS BERNARD MILLER v. AGC

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:                    CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                                                 April 29, 2011

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: