Harris v. Shore, docket T-2024-97

Date: 19990712

Docket: T-2024-97

BETWEEN:

     C. ROGER HARRIS, JOHN ADAMS and

     JENNIFER KARAGIANIS,

     Plaintiffs,

     - and -

     TERESA SHORE,

     Defendant.

     ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

CHARLES E. STINSON

Assessment Officer

[1]          The Plaintiff, C. Roger Harris (hereinafter the "Plaintiff"), presents his Bill of Costs on a solicitor and client basis for $45,153.96 further to summary judgment in this action for damages resulting from a fire deliberately set by the Defendant to a yacht owned by the Plaintiff. A subsequent reference set damages at $601,273.00.

[2]          The Plaintiff gave proper notice of the assessment. The Defendant did not appear nor contact the Registry in response. Counsel for the Plaintiff, Gregory G. Blue, informed me that the Defendant had called him on June 8, 1999 to say that the returnable date for assessment conflicted with a personal matter to which she felt she had to attend. Mr. Blue told her that he was not prepared to adjourn and that she "should make her representations to Mr. Stinson". Mr. Blue said that he did not receive notice of any such representations. There are no such representations on the Court file. Before me, Mr. Blue insisted on proceeding given that the Defendant had not taken advantage of her opportunity to make representations. After waiting thirty minutes per superior court practice, the Defendant still had not contacted the Registry or appeared. Counsel for the Plaintiff reduced two of the disbursements by removing $33.17 from agency fees (Court and filing fees) totalling $990.70 and $100.90 from process server charges totalling $217.00.

Assessment

[3]          The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having proper notice of an assessment of costs and choosing not to participate, as was the case here, benefiting by an assessment officer abdicating 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. I examined each item claimed in the Plaintiff's Bill of Costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. The Bill of Costs included an estimate of three hours at $175.00 per hour to prepare the Bill of Costs and attend on the assessment of costs. I reduced that time by thirty minutes and adjusted the service tax accordingly. I allow the Plaintiff's Bill of Costs at $44,926.27.

                             __________________________

                                 Assessment Officer

Dated at Vancouver, British Columbia this 12^th day of July, 1999.

[4]          FEDERAL COURT TRIAL DIVISION

     NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

COURT NO.:                      T-2024-97

DATE OF HEARING:                  June 17, 1999

STYLE OF CAUSE:                  C. Roger Harris et al.

                             v.

                             Teresa L. Shore

PLACE OF HEARING:                  Vancouver, British Columbia

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS

OF CHARLES E. STINSON, ASSESSMENT OFFICER

dated July 12, 1999

APPEARANCES BY:

     Mr. Gregory G. Blue              for the Plaintiffs

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

     McEwen Schmitt & Company

     Vancouver, BC                  for the Plaintiffs