Parent
Assess.
O.:
On
May
3,
1999,
the
Defendant
filed
a
bill
of
costs
further
to
the
dismissal
with
costs
of
the
Plaintiff’s
action.
The
judgment
of
the
Court
(Richard
Morneau,
Esq.,
Prothonotary)
was
rendered
on
March
12,
1999.
Attached
to
the
bill
of
costs
was
a
request
to
the
Court
for
the
issuance
of
a
notice
of
appointment
for
assessment.
On
May
12,
1999,
letters
were
sent
to
the
solicitors
for
both
parties
submitting
dates
to
file
and
serve
their
written
representations.
Written
representations
were
filed
by
the
Plaintiff
on
his
own
behalf
on
June
11,
1999
and
on
June
30,
1999
by
the
Defendant’s
solicitors.
In
its
bill
of
costs,
the
Defendant
claims
the
maximum
number
of
units
for
fees
relating
to
services
rendered
under
items
2,
10,
13
and
15
of
Tariff
B,
column
III.
The
Plaintiff’s
comments
on
the
Defendant’s
bill
of
costs
are
to
the
effect
that
the
sums
are
outrageous
and
hard
to
account
for.
In
response,
the
Defendant
mentions
that
“the
units
sought
are
reasonable
under
the
circumstances
taking
account
of
the
seriousness
and
the
complexity
of
the
issues
raised....”
I
question
the
Defendant’s
claim
for
the
maximum
of
units
under
the
items
mentioned
above.
Owing
to
the
evidence
in
support
of
the
bill
of
costs
and
the
fact
that
no
reference
is
made
to
the
services
rendered
in
this
matter
that
could
help
me
determine
the
quantum
of
costs.
Taking
into
account
the
aforementioned
and
the
criteria
stated
in
Rule
400(3),
I
have
reviewed
the
proceedings
in
this
case
and
I
believe
that
the
following
is
a
fair
compensation
for
services
rendered
by
counsel.
|
Column
Services
|
Units
Amount
|
|
Hl/Item
|
|
awarded
|
|
2
|
Preparation
and
filing
of
the
De
|
6
|
$600.00
|
|
fence
|
|
|
10
|
Preparation
for
conference,
including
|
5
|
$500.00
|
|
memorandum
|
|
|
13
|
Counsel
fees:
preparation
for
trial
|
4
|
$400.00
|
|
including
inter
alia
preparation
of
|
|
|
witnesses
|
|
|
15
|
Preparation
and
filing
of
written
ar
|
6
|
$600.00
|
|
gument
as
requested
by
the
Court
|
|
The
number
of
units
claimed
under
items
11
(1
unit)
and
14
a)
(2
units
x
6
hours)
are
allowed
as
requested.
Concerning
the
number
of
units
claimed
under
item
26
for
the
assessment
of
costs,
I
increase
it
to
2
units
since
it
is
the
lowest
number
of
units
in
Tariff
B
under
column
III.
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
$3,600.00.
A
certificate
will
issue
accordingly.
Order
accordingly.
Email this Content