Date:
20080829
Docket:
A-620-05
Citation: 2008 FCA 251
BETWEEN:
ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF CANADA
Appellant
and
JEAN
PELLETIER
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF
COSTS - REASONS
DIANE PERRIER,
ASSESSMENT OFFICER
[1]
On
January 11, 2007, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from a
decision by the Federal Court with costs in accordance with column III of
Tariff B of the Federal Courts Rules.
[2]
On
April 27, 2007, counsel for the respondent filed his bill of costs and
requested that it be assessed without personal appearance of the parties. On
December 31, 2007, letters were sent to the parties setting a schedule for
filing their written submissions. The parties have filed their written
submissions, so I am now ready to assess the bill of costs based on the documentation
on record.
[3]
Firstly,
the appellant files the following objection and requests that the assessment
officer, in accordance with rule 408(2) of the Federal Courts Rules,
offset costs owing to the respondent based on his bill of costs filed on April
27, 2007, against costs owing to the appellant based on his bill of costs filed
on February 4, 2008, in this case, and against the bill of costs that was filed
in A-73-06 dismissing the appeal against the respondent with costs.
[4]
The
assessment officer cannot offset the costs since, in this case, the appellant’s
bill of costs was filed on February 4, 2008, after the assessment officer had
sent the letters to the parties to assess the respondent’s bill of costs. In
addition, the assessment officer cannot make the adjustment in A‑73‑06,
as the set-off can only be done in the same file, since a certificate of
assessment must be issued in each Court file when the bill of costs has been
assessed.
[5]
Counsel
fees are allowed in the amount of $4,238.94 ($3,720 + $223.20 (6% GST)
+ $295.74 (7.5% QST)). I allowed item 18 – preparation of the appeal book
(1 unit), item 19 –memorandum of fact and law (7 units),
item 22 (a) – counsel fee on hearing of appeal, to first counsel, per
hour (7 hours x 3 units) and item 26 – assessment of costs (2 units). I allowed
only 2 units for the assessment, since it does not appear to be very
complicated.
[6]
It
should be noted that assessments are only partial indemnifications of
party-and-party costs. An assessment officer can allow only those costs that
have been granted by an order of the Court or based on documents filed
according to counsel fees to be assessed. Therefore, any bailiff fees for
filing documents at the registry of the Court cannot be allowed as
disbursements, since normally they would already have been offset by the
counsel fees to be assessed.
[7]
Bailiff
fees for service of a motion to dismiss an appeal cannot be allowed, given that
the order of the Court dated March 17, 2006, dismissed the motion with costs to
the appellant. Bailiff fees for service of the respondent’s motion record in
reply to the appellant’s motion to remove the respondent’s memorandum of fact
and law from the file are not allowed because, in its order dated July 12,
2006, the Court is silent as to costs. Bailiff fees for service of the
respondent’s motion for an early hearing date cannot be allowed because the
order of the Court dated October 4, 2006, is silent as to costs.
Therefore, I allowed only $51.19 for service of the memorandum of fact and
law.
[8]
I
also allowed disbursements for the joint book of statutes, regulations and
authorities in the amount of $2,299.08, as requested by the respondent, since
it was proven by the affidavit of Patrick Girard and by the accompanying
invoice.
[9]
I
am of the opinion that disbursements for the hotel, meals and transportation
during the hearing of the appeal in Ottawa will be allowed solely for first
counsel, since the decision dated January17, 2006, is silent as to costs for
second counsel. In addition, the amount of $128.42 claimed for meals seems
reasonable, since, allowing expenses according to the Travel Directive of the
Treasury Board Secretariat, I allow the sum of $34.75 for dinner and $17.30 for
incidental expenses for December 17, 2006. For December 18, 2006, I allow
$12.75 for breakfast, $12.15 for lunch, $34.75 for dinner and $17.30 for
incidental expenses, totalling $129 for both days, which seems reasonable in
these circumstances. Therefore, I allow the amount of $556.86 for
disbursements for the hotel, meals and transportation.
[10]
The
respondent’s bill of costs presented at $8,820.90 is allowed in the amount of
$7,146.07. A certificate of assessment will be issued for this amount.
MONTRÉAL,
QUEBEC
August 29, 2008
DIANE PERRIER
ASSESSMENT
OFFICER
Certified
true translation
Tu-Quynh
Trinh
FEDERAL
COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD
DOCKET:
A-620-05
Between:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Appellant
AND
JEAN PELLETIER
Respondent
ASSESSMENT
OF COSTS IN WRITING
PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Montréal, Quebec
REASONS
OF DIANE PERRIER, ASSESSMENT OFFICER
DATED: August 29, 2008
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:
Alberto
Martinez For
the appellant
Suzanne
Côté
Patrick
Girard For
the respondent
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
Deslauriers
Jeansonne, s.e.n.c.
Montréal,
Quebec For
the appellant
Stikeman
Elliott LLP
Montréal,
Quebec For
the respondent
Email this Content