Date: 20071002
Docket: A-121-06
Citation: 2007 FCA 313
BETWEEN:
713460 ONTARIO LTD.
o/a HEIRLOOM
CLOCK COMPANY
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY
THE QUEEN
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF
COSTS – REASONS
Charles
E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1]
This
appeal of a decision of the Federal Court concerning excise tax in respect of
grandfather clocks was dismissed with costs. I issued a timetable for written
disposition of the assessment 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 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 Respondent's amended bill of costs is allowed as
presented at $2,777.89
"Charles
E. Stinson"
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-121-06
STYLE OF CAUSE: 713460 ONTARIO
LTD.o/a
HEIRLOOM
CLOCK COMPANY v HMQ
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:
|
n/a
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
|
Ms. Marie
Crowley
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
|
n/a
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
|
John H. Sims,
Q.C.
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
Email this Content