No. T-3765-82
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
- and -
W. RALSTON & CO. (CANADA) INC.,
TAXATION OF COSTS - REASONS
M. LAMY
TAXING OFFICER
On July 3,1996, the Court dismissed with costs the Plaintiff's appeal against a judgment of the Tax Review Board. Mrs. Sandra Mastrogiuseppe, for the Defendant, and Mr. Roger Roy, for the Plaintiff, appeared before me on February 17, 1997, for the taxation of costs.
FEES
In its bill, the Defendant claims the maximum number of units for fees relating to services under the following items of Tariff B, Part II, Column III :
|
|
| |
Preparation and filing of defence |
| |
Preparation for trial after the first day |
| |
First counsel (9 hours X 3 units) |
| |
Preparation and filing of written agreement |
|
Units
7
5
3
5
3
27
13.5
7
6
76.5
|
Counsel for the Plaintiff pointed out that he does not oppose the taxation for services, however he questioned Defendant's claim for the maximum number of units. He argued that the facts that gave rise to this action were undisputed or well-established by the evidence which, by consent, was the same evidence adduced before the Tax Review Board. Mrs. Mastrogiuseppe then replied that the case dealt with complex issues however she did not explain what they were and how they acted upon the volume of work. As for the evidence filed in support of the bill of costs, no reference is made to the services rendered in this matter that could help me determine the quantum of costs.
Taking into account the aforementioned and the criteria stated in Rule 346(1.1), I have reviewed the proceedings in this case and I believe that the following is a fair compensation for services rendered by counsel. I award 5 units for item 2, 2 units for item 12, 4 units for item 13a), 3 units for item 13b), and 4 units for item 26. Concerning the other claims, they are taxed as follows:
| - The claim made under item 7 is refused since this action proceeded on the basis of the evidence submitted to the Tax Review Board. No discovery of documents took place and no affidavit of documents was filed. |
| - A look at the minutes of hearing reveals that 6 hours were spent in Court for the trial of this matter. Therefore, the sum of $1,800 is allowed for item 14a) i.e. 3 units X 6 hours. |
| - No fees are awarded under item 14b) as the judgment of this Court is silent on that issue. |
| - If counsel prepared and submitted a written agreement, it must be on his own initiative since there is no indication on file of such a request made by the Court in fact no agreement was filed. Therefore, the claim made under item 15 is refused. |
DISBURSEMENTS
At hearing, counsel for the Defendant was authorized to file an additional affidavit pertaining to the disbursements made for photocopies and facsimile transmissions. In addition, Mrs. Mastrogiuseppe explained in a letter dated February 24, 1997, her disbursements for printing and binding and the necessity of having five (5) copies made of the evidence submitted before the Tax Review Board and six (6) of the documentary evidence and Defendant's authorities produced at trial.
The following disbursements are claimed in connection with this action. However, a gap exists in evidencing them since all the documentation was not available.
Photocopies $2,069.16
Facsimile transmissions 80.94
Data Base Library 654.48
Printing and Binding fees 1,631.60
Court costs 211.20
Delivery and service charges 92.50
Transcripts $ 336.40
Having in mind the representations of both parties and the evidence submitted, the expenses claimed are allowed as follows:
| - On the basis of the record before me, I arrive at the conclusion that a fair number of essential pages of photocopy would be 300 pages. No acceptable explanation was given to justify the expense of $2,069.16 as all major reproduction works were done outside the law firm. Therefore, the amount of $75.00 (300 pages x $0.25) is awarded for the in-house costs of photocopying. According to the invoices submitted, I allow an additional amount of $318.94 for photocopies. |
| - Considering that the Plaintiff does not have to pay for more than 3 copies, I award $136.20 for transcripts ($227.00/5 copies), $270.40 for documentary evidence ($540.80/6 copies), $540.50 for Defendant's authorities ($504.50/5 copies + $237.80) and $18.90 for the Certified Record ($31.50/5 copies). |
| - Based on the documentary evidence adduced, the amount of $85.00 is granted for delivery and service charges as well as the sum of $629.28 for computer research. |
| - Court costs are allowed in the amount of $220.00 ($100.00 paid under Tariff A and $120.00 charged by Revenue Canada). |
| - The claim of $10.00 for 2 requests made under the Access to Information Act is accepted so is the amount of $64.74 for facsimile transmissions. |
The Defendant's bill of costs is taxed and allowed in the amount of $5,968.96 ($3,600.00 /fees + $2,368.96/disbursements) plus the applicable GST and PST.
DATED AT MONTREAL, QUEBEC, THIS 11th DAY OF MARCH 1997.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT NUMBER: T-3765-82
| BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, |
| AND: W. RALSTON & CO. (CANADA) INC., |
PLACE OF TAXATION: Montreal (Quebec)
DATE OF TAXATION: February 17, 1997
REASONS FOR TAXATION
BY: M. Lamy
DATED: March 11, 1997
APPEARANCE:
| Mr. Roger Roy for the Plaintiff |
| Mrs. Sandra Mastrogiuseppe for the Defendant |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CANADA
for the Plaintiff
GOODMAN, PHILLIPS & VINEBERG
Montreal, Quebec
for the Defendant
T-3765-82
Plaintiff,
| W. RALSTON & CO. (CANADA) INC., |
| TAXATION OF COSTS - REASONS |
Email this Content