Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Date: 20020529

Docket: A-500-98

Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 226

BETWEEN:

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                       Appellant

                                                                              - and -

                                                HUANG AND DANCZKAY LIMITED

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                               ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]                 A copy of these Reasons filed today in Court file T-2463-93 applies there accordingly. The Judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal awarded costs to the Appellant here and in the Trial Division. I issued a timetable for disposition of the Crown's bill of costs in both Divisions. The Respondent's counsel was unable to get instructions and applied successfully in both Divisions to be removed from the record. The resultant Orders have been served on the Respondent. I am satisfied from the material supporting the applications for removal as solicitor of record that the Respondent has seen the bills of costs and has been made aware of the opportunity for submissions. The Order in the Trial Division provided that the assessment may proceed without further notice if the Respondent failed to appoint new counsel within ten days of the effective date of service of the Order: the Respondent has not appointed counsel.

[2]                 The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having notice of an assessment of costs and failing to participate, benefiting by an assessment officer abdicating 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 bills of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. The bill of costs of the Plaintiff in T-2463-93 is assessed and allowed as presented at $35, 794.98. The bill of costs of the Appellant in A-500-98 is assessed and allowed as presented at $4,787.19.

   

(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"

     Assessment Officer

Vancouver, B.C.

May 29, 2002

                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                                                                 APPEAL DIVISION

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

   

DOCKET:                                             A-500-98

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Appellant

                                                                              - and -

  

HUANG AND DANCZKAY LIMITED

Respondent

    

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

  

REASONS BY:                                   CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                May 29, 2002

   

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

Morris Rosenberg                                                                           for Appellant

Deputy Attorney General of Canada