Date: 20060224
Docket: 03-A-43
Citation: 2006 FCA 84
BETWEEN:
BARBARA HAIGHT-SMITH
Appellant
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CANADA
Respondent
Assessment Officer
[1] The Appellant moved for an extension of time to commence an application for judicial review of a decision of the Tax Court of Canada. On October 28, 2003, the Court dismissed her motion with costs, not being convinced of the possibility of success in an application for judicial review and that the delay in commencement was justified. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the Respondent's revised bill of costs.
[2] The Appellant 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, ie. 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 for services of counsel which might have attracted disagreement, but the amount claimed in total in the revised 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 revised bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $2,235.65.
(Sgd.) "Charles E. Stinson"
Assessment Officer
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: 03-A-43
STYLE OF CAUSE: BARBARA HAIGHT-SMITH
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE
OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: February 24, 2006
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:
Carl Januszczak FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: