Date: 20060406
Docket: T-703-04
Citation: 2006 FC 450
BETWEEN:
CLEAR DEFENSE, INC., 121 EAST MAIN STREET,
MARTINVILLE, VIRGINIA, U.S.A 24114
Applicant
and
PLACEMENTS CONTEMPORAINS INC., 272,
ST-JEAN BAPTISTE BOULEVARD, CHATEAUGUAY,
PROVINCE OF QUEBEC, J6K 3C2;
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
PAUL G.C. ROBINSON
ASSESSMENT OFFICER
[1] This is an assessment of costs pursuant to an Order of the Federal Court dated
September 20, 2005 which dismissed the Applicant's Notice of Application with costs to the Respondent. This decision arose from the Respondent's motion dated September 14, 2005 for:
(a) An Order dismissing this proceeding pursuant to Rule 97(d) by reason of the failure of Donald Martin to attend for cross-examination upon his affidavit sworn May 4, 2004 filed in this proceeding pursuant to Rule 306, as required by the Order of Madam Prothonotary Aronovitch dated November 22, 2004; or in the alternative;
(b) An order striking out the aforesaid Affidavit of Donald Martin, pursuant to Rule 97(c);
(c) Costs of the is motion;
(d) Such other Order or relief as may seem just to this Honourable
Court.
[2] On January 6, 2005, a request for an assessment appointment was received from the Respondent and a letter was issued setting a timetable for written submissions.
[3] The Applicant did not respond, within the time frames allowed, to the Respondent's Bill of Costs and to the supporting material presented for assessment.
[4] Receipt of the timetable letter was confirmed by telephone with the parties during the week of January 23, 2006. It should be noted that the Applicant was advised at that time of the timetable requirements and was further advised to seek legal advice. The Applicant was also advised that the Assessment of Costs may proceed even if he does not file any documents in opposition to the Respondent's Bill of Costs and supporting material. The Applicant indicated he may contact the Respondent with regards to settling the issue of costs. However, during the week of March 27, 2006, a representative from the Respondent's law office confirmed that, to date, no contact had been made by the Applicant with regard to settling the issue of costs. Therefore, it is appropriate that I proceed with the assessment of costs.
[5] In this, as in all assessments of costs proceedings, I must take a position of neutrality. An Assessment Officer may neither advocate for any one party, nor allow assessable services and disbursements which fall outside of the Federal Courts Rules and the associated Tariffs.
[6] The Respondent's Bill of Costs, which includes assessable services of $1,815.00 with associated GST of $127.05 appear reasonable, have been supported by a solicitor's affidavit and are allowed in their entirety.
[7] The Respondent has requested $270.00 as a "Miscellaneous expense (pull file and provide file history)" as an associated disbursement. In my opinion, this is a normal office overhead expense associated with litigating proceedings in any Court and it is not an appropriate disbursement to be claimed in these specific circumstances. Therefore, this individual disbursement is disallowed.
[8] The remaining Respondent's disbursements of $849.50 appear reasonable and will be allowed in their entirety.
[9] The Respondent's Bill of Costs in T-703-04 is assessed and allowed in the amount of $2,791.55 which includes assessable services, disbursements and applicable GST. A certificate is issued in this Federal Court proceeding for $2,791.55 payable by the Applicant to the Respondent.
"Paul Robinson"
Paul G.C. Robinson
Assessment Officer
Toronto, Ontario
April 6, 2006
Email this Content