713460 Ontario Ltd. (Heirloom Clock Company) v. Canada
Because the appellant filed no response and the assessment officer may not certify items outside the judgment and tariff, the officer examined each claimed item and concluded the amended bill of costs was generally reasonable within the award limits and therefore allowed it in full at $2,777.89.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2007 FCA 313
- Parties
- Appellant: 713460 Ontario Ltd. o/a Heirloom Clock Company; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 2 October 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Assessment of Costs
- Outcome
- Respondent's amended bill of costs allowed
- Legal Topics
- Assessment of Costs, Tariff Interpretation, Federal Court of Appeal Procedure
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
713460 Ontario Ltd. o/a Heirloom Clock Company
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Assessment of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether items in the respondent's amended bill of costs are lawful under the judgment and tariff
- 2 Whether the assessment officer may act as an advocate for an unresponsive litigant
- 3 Whether the total amount claimed is reasonable within the limits of the award of costs
Ratio Decidendi
Because the appellant filed no response and the assessment officer may not certify items outside the judgment and tariff, the officer examined each claimed item and concluded the amended bill of costs was generally reasonable within the award limits and therefore allowed it in full at $2,777.89.
Court Disposition
Respondent's amended bill of costs allowed
Orders
- Respondent's amended bill of costs allowed as presented at $2,777.89
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
713460 Ontario Ltd. (Heirloom Clock Company) v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2007-10-02 Neutral citation 2007 FCA 313 File numbers A-121-06 Decision Content Date: 20071002 Docket: A-121-06 Citation: 2007 FCA 313 BETWEEN: 713460 ONTARIO LTD. o/a HEIRLOOM CLOCK COMPANY Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS – REASONS Charles E. Stinson Assessment Officer [1] This appeal of a decision of the Federal Court concerning excise tax in respect of grandfather clocks 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 having an assessment officer step away from a neutral position 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 amended bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. There were items which might have attracted disagreement, but the total amount claimed in the amended bill of costs is generally arguable as reasonable within the limits of the award of costs. The Respondent's amended bill of costs is allowed as presented at $2,777.89 "Charles E. Stinson" Assessment Officer FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-121-06 STYLE OF CAUSE: 713460 ONTARIO LTD.o/a HEIRLOOM CLOCK COMPANY v HMQ ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: CHARLES E. STINSON DATED: October 2, 2007 WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS: n/a FOR THE APPELLANT Ms. Marie Crowley FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: n/a FOR THE APPELLANT John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT