Canada (National Revenue) v. Reddy, 2009 FC 498

Date: 20090513

Docket: T-1799-07

Citation: 2009 FC 498

BETWEEN:

MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE

Applicant

and

VALLIAMMA REDDY

Respondent

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]               The Court dismissed with costs the Respondent’s application pursuant to subsection 225.2(8) of the Income Tax Act (the Act) for review of an ex parte order issued further to subsections 225.2(2) and (3) of the Act concerning an assessed amount of tax the collection of which would be jeopardized by delay. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Applicant’s bill of costs.

[2]               The Respondent did not file any materials in response to the Applicant’s materials. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant benefiting by having an assessment officer step away from a neutral position 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. The total amount in the Applicant’s bill of costs is generally arguable as reasonable within the limits of the award of costs and is allowed as presented at $8,709.88.

“Charles E. Stinson”

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          T-1799-07

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          MNR v. VALLIAMMA REDDY

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:                    CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                                                 May 13, 2009

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: