Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Docherty v. Canada

Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date 2006-10-04
Neutral citation 2006 FCA 319
File numbers A-16-04

Decision Content

 

 

 

 

Date: 20061004

Docket: A-16-04

Citation: 2006 FCA 319

BETWEEN:

WILLIAM DOCHERTY

Appellant

and

 

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]               A copy of these Reasons is filed today in Federal Court of Appeal file A-17-04 (Ronald Hakem v. Her Majesty the Queen) and applies there accordingly.

 

[2]               These appeals, addressing a decision of the Tax Court of Canada concerning the tax liability of business partners, were dismissed with one set of costs in the lead file A-16-04. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the assessment of the Respondent’s bill of costs.

 

[3]               The Appellants did not file any materials in response to the Respondent’s materials. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant 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 costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. There were items which might have attracted disagreement, but the amount claimed in total in the bill of costs is generally arguable within the limits of the award of costs as reasonable in the circumstances of this litigation. The Respondent’s bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $2,982.00.

 

 

“Charles E. Stinson”

Assessment Officer

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

 

NAME OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

 

DOCKET:                                          A-16-04

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          WILLIAM DOCHERTY v.

                                                            HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

 

 

 

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:                    CHARLES E. STINSON

 

DATED:                                                                                 October 4, 2006

 

 

 

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:

 

n/a

FOR THE APPELLANT

 

Ronald MacPhee

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Barat, Farlam, Millson

Windsor, ON

 

FOR THE APPELLANT

John H. Sims, Q.C.

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

 

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 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.