Richer v. Freeland, 2008 FCA 137

Date: 20080411

Docket: A-480-06

Citation: 2008 FCA 137

BETWEEN:

JEAN RICHER

Appellant

and

MARIA LYNN FREELAND, INDEPENDENT CHAIRPERSON

SASKATCHEWAN PENITENTIARY, AND

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondents

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]               The Court dismissed with costs this appeal from a decision of the Federal Court dismissing an application to quash a conviction for failure to provide a urine sample. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the assessment of the Respondents’ bill of costs.

[2]               The Appellant did not file any materials in response to the Respondents’ 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 bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. The total amount claimed is generally arguable as reasonable within the limits of the award of costs and is allowed as presented at $1,080.00.

“Charles E. Stinson”

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          A-480-06

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          JEAN RICHER v. MARIA LYNN FREELAND et al.

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:                    CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                                                 April 11, 2008

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: