Macdonald v. Ontario, 2001 FCA 335

Date: 20011106

Docket: A-455-99

Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 335

BETWEEN:

                                                              IAN V. MACDONALD

                                                                                                                                      Appellant (Plaintiff)

                                                                              - and -

                                HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO

                                           THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO

                                           THE HONOURABLE CHARLES HARNICK

                                                    WILLIAM MALCOLM BISHOP

                                                    TERRANCE STERLING BISHOP

                                                           MICHAEL CHINKIWSKY

                                                                         S. BERGAU

                                                                                                                            Respondent (Defendant)

                                               ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]                 A copy of these Reasons is filed today in Court file T-733-99 and applies there accordingly. The action of the Appellant (Plaintiff) was struck with costs in favour of the Defendant Michael Chinkiwsky. The appeal against that decision was dismissed with costs in favour of the Respondent Chinkiwsky . The Respondent Chinkiwsky filed his Bill of Costs combining elements of the Trial Division and Appeal Division litigation. The Appellant (Plaintiff) did not respond to notice of the timetable issued for written disposition of this bill of costs. 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 Bill of Costs and the supporting materials within those parameters.

[2]                 The Bill of Costs of the Respondent, Michael Chinkiwsky, presented at $1,819.00, is assessed and allowed at $1,819.00.

(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"

      Assessment Officer

Vancouver, B.C.

November 6, 2001

                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                             A-455-99

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           Ian V. MacDonald

- and -

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario et al.

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING

WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

REASONS BY:                                                                            CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                                                       November 6, 2001

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Crown Law Office - Civil                                                              for the Respondents,

Attorney General for Ontario                                                         Her Majesty the Queen in Right

Toronto, Ontario                                                                            of Ontario, the Attorney General for Ontario, The Hon. Charles Harnick and S. Bergau

Cooligan Ryan                                                                               for the Respondents,

Ottawa, Ontario                                                                             W.M. Bishop and T.S. Bishop

Nelligan O'Brien Payne                                                                 for the Respondent,

Ottawa, Ontario                                                                             M. Chinkiwsky