Date: 20041214
Docket: T-830-03
Citation: 2004 FC 1737
BETWEEN:
RONALD ARTHUR TENEYCKE
Applicant
- and -
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Charles E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1] This application for judicial review of a decision of the Appeal Division of the National Parole Board was dismissed with costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Respondent's bill of costs.
[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 Court Rules, 1998 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, ie. those outside the authority of the judgment and the tariff. I examined each item claimed in the bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. The amount claimed in total in the bill of costs is generally arguable within the limits of the award of costs as reasonable in the circumstances of this litigation. The Respondent's amended bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $2,150.14.
(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"
Assessment Officer
Vancouver, BC
December 14, 2004
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-830-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: RONALD ARTHUR TENEYCKE
- and -
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: December 14, 2004
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Zipp & Company
Coquitlam, BC for Applicant
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada for Respondent
Email this Content