Canadian Federation of Students v. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, 2010 FC 412

Date: 20100415

Docket: T-1336-06

Citation: 2010 FC 412

BETWEEN:

CANADIAN FEDERATION OF STUDENTS

Applicant

and

NATURAL SCIENCES AND ENGINEERING

RESEARCH COUNCIL OF CANADA

Respondent

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Johanne Parent

Assessment Officer

[1]               On April 18, 2008, the Application pursuant to Section 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act for judicial review of a decision of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada was dismissed by the Court with costs to the respondent. Further to the reception of the respondent’s Bill of Costs on January 14, 2010, a timetable for written disposition of its assessment was issued on February 16, 2010 and sent to both parties. While counsel for the respondent filed the necessary material to justify fees and disbursements within the prescribed timeframe, submissions in reply on behalf of the applicant were not received by the Registry of the Court in the allocated timeframe, nor was any request to extend the time to file said submissions received. The assessment of the respondent’s Bill of Costs will therefore proceed despite its non-contestation.

[2]               In Dahl v. Canada, 2007 FC 192, [2007] F.C.J. No. 256, my colleague stated at paragraph 2:

Effectively, the absence of any relevant representations by the Plaintiff, which could assist me in identifying issues and making a decision, leaves the bill of costs unopposed. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules 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, i.e. those outside the authority of the judgment and the Tariff.

In accordance with the above referenced comments and considering the lack of challenge by the opposing party, I am prepared to certify the items in the respondent’s Bill of Costs which are not unlawful or outside the authority of the Court Judgment and the Tariff.

[3]               The fees claimed for preparation for an examination (Item 8), attendance on examination (Item 9), counsel fee for hearing (Item 14), services after judgment (Item 25) and assessment of costs (Item 26) are allowed as claimed. The respondent claimed eight Units under Item 13 for counsel fee preparation for hearing. This Item fee will be reduced to five Units considering the maximum allowable under Column III of Tariff B.

[4]               With regard to the disbursements claimed, they are supported by affidavit, not contested and considered charges necessary to the conduct of this matter. The amounts claimed are reasonable and allowed.

[5]               The respondent’s bill of costs is allowed for a total amount of $7,101.12.

                                                                                                                      “Johanne Parent”

Toronto, Ontario

April 15, 2010

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          T-1336-06

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          CANADIAN FEDERATION OF STUDENTS v. NATURAL SCIENCES AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH COUNCIL OF CANADA

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

PLACE OF ASSESSMENT:                                                 TORONTO, ONTARIO

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:                    JOHANNE PARENT

DATED:                                                                                 April 15, 2010

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: