Date: 20060830
Docket: A-541-04
Citation: 2006 FCA 290
BETWEEN:
HENRY TING MING NG
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Charles
E. Stinson
Assessment
Officer
[1]
This
appeal, from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada dismissing the Appellant’s
appeal in that Court for non-compliance with certain orders, was dismissed with
costs. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the assessment of the
Respondent’s 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, 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 $2,144.52.
“Charles
E. Stinson”
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAME OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-541-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: HENRY
TING MING NG
-
and –
HER MAJESTY THE
QUEEN
ASSESSMENT
OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON
DATED: August 30, 2006
WRITTEN
REPRESENTATIONS BY:
n/a
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
Thomas Torrie
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
n/a
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
John H. Sims,
Q.C.
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|