Date: 20071221
Docket: A-3-04
Citation: 2007 FCA 412
BETWEEN:
BJARNE
AASLAND
Appellant
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF
COSTS - REASONS
Charles E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1]
After
a Notice of Status Review and certain orders and directions permitting the
Appellant to perfect his materials concerning his appeal of a decision of the
Tax Court of Canada, the Court dismissed his appeal with costs. I issued a
timetable for written disposition of the assessment of the Respondent's bill of
costs.
[2]
The
Appellant 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]
I
examined each item claimed in the bill of costs and the supporting materials
within those parameters. The amount claimed ($353.90 for the transcript of the
proceeding in the Tax Court of Canada) is reasonable in these circumstances. As
requested, I add an allowance for counsel fee item 26 (assessment of costs) of
$240.00 (the minimum in the available range) leaving the Respondent's bill of
costs assessed and allowed at $593.90.
"Charles
E. Stinson"
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-3-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: BJARNE
AASLAND v. HMQ
ASSESSMENT
OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: December 21, 2007
WRITTEN
REPRESENTATIONS:
n/a
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
(self-represented)
|
Penny L. Piper
Jeff Pniowsky
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
n/a
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
John H. Sims,
Q.C.
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|