Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20020822

Docket: T-458-99

Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 898

BETWEEN:

                                                            JOHN ROBERT MORIN,

                                                       RICHARD WILLIAM MORIN,

                                                               FLORENCE MORIN,

                                               ISABELLE MORIN, JOHN A. MORIN,

                                                            AND THERESA MORIN

                                                                                                                                                     Appellants

                                                                              - and -

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                            IN RIGHT OF CANADA,

                                                   THE MINISTER OF INDIAN AND

                                                NORTHERN AFFAIRS CANADA, and

                                                   THE ENOCH CREE NATION #440

                                                                                                                                               Respondents

                                               ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]                 The Court allowed this appeal, with costs, addressing a decision concerning the estate of the father of the Appellants. I issued a timetable for disposition of the Appellants' bill of costs in writing.


[2]                 The Appellants argued that the mid-range values for counsel fees in Tariff B are recoverable. The Appellants argued that Teledyne Industries Inc. v. Lido Industrial Products Ltd. (1981) 56 C.P.R. (2d) 93 (Fed. T.D.) holds that affidavit evidence that disbursements were incurred and paid may replace receipts from payees. The Appellants relied upon M.N.R. v. Bethlehem Corp. (1976) 71 D.L.R. (3d) 313 (Fed. C.A.) to ask for costs of the assessment and interest payable from the date of judgment. The Appellants asked for an interest rate of 5%. The Respondents did not file submissions.

Assessment


[3]                 The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having notice of an assessment of costs and not participating, 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 coss and the supporting material within those parameters. Although there might have been difficulty with the choice of one fee item, the total amount claimed for fees is arguable, and reasonable, within the limits of the tariff. I add 2 units under item 26 for the assessment process. The bill of costs of the Appellants, presented at $5,334.51, is assessed and allowed at $5,554.51. Per Wilson v. Canada 2000 D.T.C. 6641, I will apply the Federal Court Act, s. 37(1), the Judgment Interest Act, R.S.A. 2001, c. J-1 and the Judgment Interest Regulation, A.R. 364/84, to post-judgment interest. The requested rate of interest of 5% is within the limits of their provisions and I allow it from the date of judgment: December 20, 2001.

   

(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"

     Assessment Officer

   

Vancouver, B.C.

August 22, 2002


                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                                                                 TRIAL DIVISION

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

   

DOCKET:                                             T-458-99

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           JOHN ROBERT MORIN et al.

Appellants

- and -

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN et al.

Respondents

  

ASSESSMENT IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

  

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS BY:              CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                August 22, 2002

   

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Parlee McLaws                                                                              for Appellants

Edmonton, AB

Morris Rosenberg                                                                           for Respondent

Deputy Attorney General of Canada     Her Majesty the Queen in Right

Ottawa, ON                                                                                    of Canada and the Minister of

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada

Biamonre Cairo and Shortreed                                                     for Respondent

Edmonton, AB                                                                               The Enoch Cree Nation #440

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.