Archambault v. Canada
- Citation
- 2002 FCT 484
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Federal Court
- Decision
- 29 April 2002
- Posture
- Assessment of Costs (federal Court) / Assessment of Costs Without Personal Appearance; Bill Filed December 3, 2001; Assessment on Written Submissions
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Federal Court
- Decision
- 29 April 2002
- Posture
- Assessment of Costs (federal Court) / Assessment of Costs Without Personal Appearance; Bill Filed December 3, 2001; Assessment on Written Submissions
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
Because the defendant filed the bill and no representations were filed by the plaintiff, the fees claimed were allowed; claimed disbursements were rejected for failure to provide the proof required by s.1(4) of Tariff B; the Tariff B unit value increase to $110 effective April 1, 2001 was applied to the bill filed December 3, 2001; accordingly fees of $10,615.00 were assessed and a certificate will be issued.
Court disposition
Bill of costs assessed and allowed in part: fees allowed and disbursements rejected.
Orders
- Defendant's fees assessed and allowed in the amount of $10,615.00.
- Claims for disbursements of $170.40 (photocopies) and $1,382.40 (transcript) are rejected for lack of proof under Tariff B s.1(4).
- Assessment calculated applying Tariff B unit value of $110.00 effective April 1, 2001.
- A certificate in the amount of $10,615.00 will be issued.
02
Material facts
Parties
CLAUDE F. ARCHAMBAULT
Plaintiff Counsel: Claude F. Archambault & AssociésHER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Defendant Counsel: Morris Rosenberg, Deputy Attorney General of CanadaAmounts and remedies
- Fees Allowed: CAD 10,615
- Photocopies Claimed (rejected): CAD 170.4
- Transcript Claimed (rejected): CAD 1,382.4
- Tariff Unit Value Applied: CAD 110
03
Procedural history
Posture
Assessment of Costs (federal Court) / Assessment of Costs Without Personal Appearance; Bill Filed December 3, 2001; Assessment on Written Submissions
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the defendant's bill of costs should be allowed
- 02
Whether claimed disbursements are proven as required by subsection 1(4) of Tariff B
- 03
Whether the increased unit value under subsection 4(1) of Tariff B applies to the bill filed December 3, 2001
- 04
Whether a certificate for costs should be issued
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Defendant filed a bill of costs claiming fees and disbursements, requested assessment on written submissions, claimed $170.40 for photocopies and $1,382.40 for transcript of examinations for discovery, and relied on Tariff B including the unit value increase effective April 1, 2001.
- Respondent
- Plaintiff did not serve any representations or supporting evidence within the prescribed time and therefore made no submissions opposing or supporting the disbursements.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Tariff B, Federal Court Rules, s.1(4)
Disbursements must be supported by evidence as required by Tariff B before they can be allowed.
- 02
Tariff B, Federal Court Rules, s.4(1)
Increased unit values in Tariff B apply to bills filed after the effective date of the increase.
- 03
Federal Court assessment procedure under the Federal Court Rules
Where no representations are filed, assessment may proceed on the basis of the filed bill and available material.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
Because the defendant filed the bill and no representations were filed by the plaintiff, the fees claimed were allowed; claimed disbursements were rejected for failure to provide the proof required by s.1(4) of Tariff B; the Tariff B unit value increase to $110 effective April 1, 2001 was applied to the bill filed December 3, 2001; accordingly fees of $10,615.00 were assessed and a certificate will be issued.
Obiter and limits
- Assessment proceeded on written submissions because none were received from the parties.
- A certificate will be issued in the assessed amount.
Court disposition
Bill of costs assessed and allowed in part: fees allowed and disbursements rejected.
- Defendant's fees assessed and allowed in the amount of $10,615.00.
- Claims for disbursements of $170.40 (photocopies) and $1,382.40 (transcript) are rejected for lack of proof under Tariff B s.1(4).
- Assessment calculated applying Tariff B unit value of $110.00 effective April 1, 2001.
- A certificate in the amount of $10,615.00 will be issued.
Source and reliance status
Federal Court · 29 April 2002
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Federal Court
Judgment· 29 April 2002
Archambault v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-04-29 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 484 File numbers T-1640-83 Decision Content Date: 20020429 Docket: T-1640-83 Neutral Citation: 2002 FCT 484 Between: CLAUDE F. ARCHAMBAULT Plaintiff and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS RICHARD LARABIE, ASSESSMENT OFFICER [1] On December 3, 2001, counsel for the defendant filed his bill of costs for assessment pursuant to the order of the Honourable Madam Justice Tremblay-Lamer dated May 12, 1998. [2] In a letter accompanying his bill of costs, Charles Camirand asked the assessment officer to proceed with the assessment on the basis of written submissions. Letters were then sent to the parties on March 4, 2002, inviting them to prepare and serve their representations, and since none were received within the prescribed time period, the bill of costs of the defendant is assessed and allowed as claimed, except for the disbursements. [3] With respect to disbursements, counsel is claiming $170.40 for photocopies and $1,382.40 for the transcript of the examinations for discovery, but he has not provided any explanation, supporting documents or affidavit justifying these disbursements or establishing that they were made within the current proceedings. In the absence of proof required by subsection 1(4) of Tariff B, these claims are rejected. [4] Moreover, because the unit value was increased under subsection 4(1) of Tariff B to $110.00 effective April 1, 2001, and because the bill of costs was filed on December 3, 2001, it is assessed taking this increase into account. [5] The defendant's costs are therefore assessed and allowed in the amount of $10,615.00 for fees. A certificate in that amount will be issued. Signed : R. Larabie RICHARD LARABIE
ASSESSMENT OFFICER MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC April 29, 2002 Certified true translation Mary Jo Egan, LLB
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: T-1640-83 Between: CLAUDE F. ARCHAMBAULT Plaintiff
AND
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant
ASSESSMENT OF COSTS WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Montréal, Quebec REASONS BY RICHARD LARABIE, ASSESSMENT OFFICER DATE OF REASONS: April 29, 2002 SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Claude F. Archambault & Associés Montréal, Quebec for the plaintiff Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario for the defendant
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION Date: 20020429 Docket: T-1640-83 BETWEEN: CLAUDE F. ARCHAMBAULT Plaintiff and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.