Parent
Assess.
O.:
The
Defendant’s
bill
of
costs
was
filed
on
May
3,
1999,
together
with
a
request
for
a
notice
of
appointment
for
assessment
to
be
issued
by
the
Court.
On
May
12,
1999,
solicitors
for
Plaintiff
and
Defendant
were
required
by
letter
to
file
and
serve
their
written
representations
regarding
the
said
bill
of
costs.
The
Plaintiff,
on
his
own
behalf,
filed
representations
on
June
11,
1999,
and
Defendant’s
solicitor,
on
June
30,
1999.
The
Defendant’s
bill
of
costs
was
filed
pursuant
to
the
order
of
Richard
Morneau,
Esq.,
Prothonotary
of
January
19,
1998,
striking
the
statement
of
claim,
the
whole
with
costs.
Considering
the
criteria
of
Rule
400(3)
of
the
Federal
Court
Rules,
1998
and
my
analysis
of
this
particular
file,
items
2
and
26
are
allowed
as
requested.
As
for
item
5,
no
costs
shall
be
allowed
for
the
preparation
and
filing
of
a
contested
motion
dated
January
19,
1996
since
the
order
on
that
motion
is
silent
on
that
point.
But,
costs
are
allowed
as
requested
at
item
5
for
the
preparation
and
filing
of
a
contested
motion
dated
December
11,
1997,
including
materials
and
responses
thereto.
The
amount
of
$
118.28
requested
in
disbursements
is
allowed
as
it
is
well
established
by
the
affidavit
of
Eric
Lafrenière
and
by
the
evidence
on
file
that
the
disbursements
were
made.
Finally,
in
response
to
the
Plaintiff’s
argument
of
poverty,
I
will
cite
Mr.
Justice
Gibson
in
Nike
Canada
Ltd.
v.
Jane
Doe
(June
22,
1999),
Doc.
T-
2027-97
(Fed.
T.D.),
“In
an
award
of
costs,
neither
the
ability
to
pay
nor
the
difficulty
of
collection
should
be
a
deciding
factor”.
The
Defendant’s
costs
are
taxed
and
allowed
in
the
amount
of
$1,718.28.
A
certificate
will
issue
accordingly.
Order
accordingly.
Email this Content