Date: 20070220
Docket: A-147-04
Citation: 2007 FCA 77
BETWEEN:
KEITH
ANSTEAD
Appellant
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF
COSTS - REASONS
Charles E. Stinson
Assessment Officer
[1]
This
appeal of a decision of the Tax Court of Canada denying deductions relative to
spousal payments was dismissed with costs to the Respondent. 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 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, 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. There were items which might
have attracted disagreement, but 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, presented at $1,846.75, is assessed and allowed at $2,326.75 (mid-range
costs of $480.00 under item 26 for the assessment of costs having been included
at the Respondent's request).
"Charles
E. Stinson"
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-147-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: KEITH
ANSTEAD v. HMQ
ASSESSMENT
OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: February 20, 2007
WRITTEN
REPRESENTATIONS BY:
|
n/a
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
|
Robert Gosman
|
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