Date: 20071002
Docket: T-2203-04
Citation: 2007 FC 1005
BETWEEN:
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Plaintiff
and
713460 ONTARIO LTD.
o/a HEIRLOOM
CLOCK COMPANY
Defendant
ASSESSMENT OF
COSTS – REASONS
Charles
E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1]
The
Court allowed this action with costs concerning excise tax in respect of
grandfather clocks. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the
assessment of the Plaintiff's bill of costs.
[2]
The
Defendant did not file any materials in response to the Plaintiff'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. I examined each item claimed in the amended bill
of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. There were items
which might have attracted disagreement, but the total amount claimed in the
amended bill of costs is generally arguable as reasonable within the limits of
the award of costs. The Plaintiff's amended bill of costs is allowed as
presented at $5,879.30.
"Charles
E. Stinson"
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-2203-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: HMQ
v. 713460 ONTARIO LTD.
o/a HEIRLOOM
CLOCK COMPANY
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE
OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E.
STINSON
DATED: October
2, 2007
WRITTEN
REPRESENTATIONS:
|
Ms. Marie
Crowley
|
FOR THE PLAINTIFF
|
|
n/a
|
FOR THE DEFENDANT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
|
John H. Sims,
Q.C.
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE PLAINTIFF
|
|
n/a
|
FOR THE DEFENDANT
|
Email this Content