Date: 20030515
Docket: T-1228-99
Citation: 2003 FCT 619
BETWEEN:
AHMED RABAH
Applicant
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
S. FINDLAY
ASSESSMENT OFFICER
[1] The applicant sought judicial review of a decision of the Canadian Human Rights Commission ("the Commission") dated May 10, 1999, dismissing the applicant's complaint of discrimination on the basis of nationality or ethnic origin. The Court dismissed the judicial review with costs to the respondent.
[2] I directed that the bill of costs of the respondent, the Attorney General of Canada, be addressed by the service and filing of written material. I note that no reply materials were filed by the applicant and the time frame to do so, as set out in my timetable, has lapsed. I am in receipt of a letter submitted by the applicant received April 22, 2003 indicating no payment will be made on this matter due to the applicant's impecunious position. Counsel for the respondent sought directions upon receiving the applicant's letter and was informed by the registry to request an extension of time to file rebuttal material. A letter from the respondent was received April 28, 2003 indicating they would not be submitting any further submissions. I intend to proceed in writing with the assessment of costs pursuant to Federal Court Rules 402 and 412.
[3] I examined each item claimed in the bill of costs (presented in total $1,666.22) within the parameters of the Federal Court Rules and Tariff B. The minimum amount claimed by the respondent for item 2 relative to the respondent's preparation of response material is reasonable and costs are allowed at $110.00. I note the applicant filed a discontinuance on consent pursuant to Federal Court Rule 166. As such, the amount claimed by the respondent for the preparation and filing of an uncontested motion for discontinuance at $110.00 is not filed of record and is denied.
[4] The respondent claimed $110.00 for item 4 relative to the preparation and filing of the uncontested motion for setting aside and vacating the notice of discontinuance and $110.00 for item 13, corrected to item 6, for the appearance on motion returnable November 27, 2000 whereby the resulting orders were silent as to costs. I have no authority as assessment officer to allow costs if the Court has not exercised its authority for costs in the first instance under Federal Court Rule 400(1). As such, the amounts claimed by the respondent for the motions are denied.
[5] The counsel fee per hour in Court for the Judicial Review Hearing for item 14 at $330.00 is reasonable and allowed. I determined that costs are reasonably claimed at the low end of item 15, corrected to item I, for the preparation and filing of the application record at $220.00 and of item 26 for the assessment of costs at $220.00 and are therefore allowed.
[6] Having reviewed the file and the affidavit of disbursements, the fees for service and filing of the notice of appearance and record are allowed as requested. Similar to the reasons above, the fees of Legal Express for the filing of motion material are not allowed as the resulting order was silent as to costs. Therefore, the fees for assessable service presented at $161.68 are allowed at $140.28.
[7] The fee for photocopying the application record dated May 29, 2000 at $202.26 is allowed as requested. The remaining fees for photocopying at $86.48 relate to motion material and are disallowed pursuant to Rule 400(1). Therefore, the total fees for photocopying presented at $288.74 are reduced to $202.26.
[8] Tariff B authorizes disbursements, but does not prohibit categories of disbursements. There is no need to preclude travel expenses if reasonable and necessary to expedite litigation, however, the taxi chit presented at $15.81 indicates travel from work to home suggesting a shortfall on the evidence as related to the case. As such, the taxi chit presented at $15.80 is disallowed.
[9] I have noted and corrected the addition of the total disbursements from $452.22 to $466.22 and total fees and disbursements from $1,666.22 to $1,676.22.
[10] Order August 15, 2002 orders the $150.00 plus accrued interest to be paid to the respondent. The bill of costs and the submissions on behalf of the respondent accounts for this payment by requesting that the assessed amount be reduced by $156.72. I have done so.
[11] The respondent's bill of costs presented at $1,666.22 and corrected to $1,676.22 is assessed and allowed at $1,065.82.
"Susan Findlay"
S. Findlay
Assessment Officer
Toronto, Ontario
May 15, 2003
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1228-99
STYLE OF CAUSE: AHMED RABAH
Applicant
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS -
REASONS BY: SUSAN FINDLAY
DATED: THURSDAY, MAY 15, 2003
ASSESSMENT IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Ahmed Rabah
Toronto, Ontario
For the Applicant, on his own behalf
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20030515
Docket: T-1228-99
BETWEEN:
AHMED RABAH
Applicant
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Email this Content