[1] This appeal, against a decision of the Tax Court of Canada concerning computation of income relative to losses said to have been incurred by a partnership, was heard with five other matters on essentially the same issues. The six appeals were dismissed with one set of costs. The Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Respondent's bill of costs.

[2] The Appellant did not file any materials in response to the Respondent's materials. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant benefiting by an assessment officer stepping away from 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, ie. 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 amount claimed in total in the bill of costs is generally arguable within the limits of the award of costs as reasonable in the circumstances of this litigation. The Respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $1,865.83.

(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"

Assessment Officer

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET: A-55-01

STYLE OF CAUSE: WATER'S EDGE VILLAGE ESTATES

(PHASE II) LTD.

- and -

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE

OF THE PARTIES

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED: January 5, 2006

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Boughton Peterson Yang Anderson FOR APPELLANT

Vancouver, BC

John H. Sims, Q.C. FOR RESPONDENT

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

You are here

Water's Edge Village Estates (Phase II) Ltd. v. Canada, 2006 FCA 4

Citations2006 FCA 4

Case tabs

Citations
2006 FCA 4