Federal Court Decisions

Date: 20020711

Docket: T-1082-00

Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 779

BETWEEN:

                                                              RACHEL LEAH MOSS

                                                                                                                                                       Applicant

                                                                              - and -

                                           MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE and

                                      CANADA CUSTOMS AND REVENUE AGENCY

                                                                                                                                               Respondents

                                               ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]                 This application for injunctive relief was dismissed with costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Respondent's bill of costs. The Applicant sent a note (in which the spelling of the given name differed from that in the style of cause) to the Registry that an assessment of costs is premature and should be adjourned because this entire matter "is presently before the Supreme Court and the above costs may be wiped out by the end of the day". As well, she indicated that her solicitor of record no longer represents her and that she would require time to secure new counsel if this matter is to proceed. The Respondent asserted that this matter has not been to the Federal Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court of Canada and argued that the assessment of costs should proceed.

[2]                 The timetable provided an opportunity for the Applicant to take steps to respond to the Respondent's assertion that this matter is not before the Supreme Court of Canada and that the assessment of costs should proceed. There has been no such response nor any indication of any effort to remove her current solicitor of record and to secure new counsel. The assessment of costs may proceed on the basis of the material to date.

[3]                 The Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not contemplate a litigant, having proper notice of an assessment of costs, 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 Respondent's Bill of Costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. The Respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $4,190.17.

  

(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"

        Assessment Officer

Vancouver, B.C.

July 11, 2002

                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                                                                 TRIAL DIVISION

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

   

DOCKET:                                             T-1082-00

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           RACHEL LEAH MOSS

Applicant

- and -

  

MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE et al.

  

Respondents

    

ASSESSMENT IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

  

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS BY:              CHARLES E. STINSON

  

DATED:                                                                                        July 11, 2002

   

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Thompson Dorfman Sweatman

Winnipeg, Manitoba                                                                       for Applicant

  

Morris Rosenberg                                                                           for Respondent

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario