Federal Court Decisions

Date: 20090622

Docket: 07-T-49

Citation: 2009 FC 651

[ENLGISH TRANSLATION]
BETWEEN:

DUC DUONG PHAM

 Plaintiff

and

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Defendant

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – REASONS

DIANE PERRIER, ASSESSMENT OFFICER

[1]               On November 30, 2007, the plaintiff filed a discontinuance of his application for an extension of time to file a judicial review; the defendant, under Rule 402 of the Federal Courts Rules, is therefore entitled to those costs.

[2]               On March 24, 2009, counsel for the defendant filed a bill of costs and asked that it be assessed without appearance of the parties. On April 23, 2009, letters were sent to the parties setting a timeline for filing written submissions. Since I have not received any written submissions to date, I am now ready to assess the costs based on the documentation on record.

[3]               The plaintiff claims 7 units for item 2 – Statement of claim and counterclaim. It would have been more appropriate to use item 5 instead of item 2, because item 5 is under heading “B. Motions” of Tariff B. However, I cannot allow this item and the disbursements because there is no Court order that rules on this motion and the costs thereof under Rule 400(1) of the Federal Courts Rules.

[4]               The defendant claims 6 units for assessment (item 26). Since this is neither challenged or complicated, I will allow 2 units.

[5]               The defendant’s bill of costs is allowed and assessed in the amount of $240. A certificate of assessment will be issued for this amount. 

MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC

June 22, 2009

“Diane Perrier”

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          07-T-49

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          DUC DUONG PHAM v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING

PLACE OF ASSESSMENT:             Montréal, Quebec

REASONS OF: DIANE PERRIER, ASSESSMENT OFFICER

DATED:                                            June 22, 2009

SOLICITORS OF RECORD