Sahaguian v. Canada, 2011 FC 1109

Date: 20110927

Docket: T-1760-09

Citation: 2011 FC 1109

BETWEEN:

          REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS

JOHANNE PARENT, Assessment Officer

[1]               On January 19, 2010, the Court ordered that the plaintiff/appellant’s motion for an order setting aside the Order of December 23, 2009, be dismissed with costs in favor of the defendant/ respondent. Upon receipt of the defendant/respondent’s Bill of Costs, directions were issued and sent to the parties informing them that this assessment of costs would proceed in writing and of the deadline to file representations.

[2]               Counsel for the defendant/respondent filed the affidavit of Marina Sushko sworn June 9, 2011 within the prescribed timeframe. No other submissions were received by the Registry of the Court, nor was any request to extend the time to file submissions. In Dahl v. Canada, 2007 FC 192(A.O.), my colleague stated at paragraph 2:

Effectively, the absence of any relevant representations by the Plaintiff, which could assist me in identifying issues and making a decision, leaves the bill of costs unopposed. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant benefiting by an assessment officer stepping away from 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.

[3]               In accordance with the above referenced comments and considering the lack of challenge by the opposing party, I am prepared to determine the weight that should be given to the factors submitted in the defendant/respondent’s Bill of Costs.

[4]               In considering the assessable services claimed under Tariff B of the Federal Courts Rules, the counsel fees claimed for the preparation and filing of a response to a contested motion for which the Court awarded costs on January 19, 2010 (Unit 5) and the counsel fees claimed for the preparation and filing of a contested motion for which the Court awarded costs on December 23, 2009 as well as for the assessment of costs (Item 26) will be allowed as claimed.

[5]                I examined the disbursements claimed along with the affidavit and supporting material. I consider them necessary charges to the conduct of this matter. The amounts are reasonable and are therefore allowed.

[6]               The Bill of Costs is allowed for a total amount of $2,753.04.

FEDERAL COURT

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          T-1760-09

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          HRATCH SAHAGUIAN v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT

OF COSTS BY:                                  JOHANNE PARENT, Assessment Officer

DATED:                                             September 27, 2011

REPRESENTATIONS:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: