Scheuneman v. Canada (Attorney General)

Scheuneman v. Canada (Attorney General)

The assessment officer lacked jurisdiction to deny costs under Rule 400(1) where the court had not exercised that jurisdiction; the officer must assess the bill within the limits of the judgment and the tariff, apply Tariff B4(2) rounding rules, and may exercise discretion to adjust units to achieve a reasonable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2004 FC 1764
Parties
Applicant: Eric Scheuneman; Respondent: Attorney General of Canada
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Assessment of Costs
Outcome
Notice of Application struck as beyond jurisdiction and an abuse of process; Respondent's bill of costs assessed and allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction, Assessment of Costs, Tariff Interpretation, Federal Court Rules
Source Language
english
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Costs Assessment Procedural Law Abuse of Process Jurisdiction Assessment of Costs Tariff Interpretation +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eric Scheuneman

Applicant

Attorney General of Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Assessment of Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Notice of Application for judicial review was beyond the Court's jurisdiction and constituted an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the assessment officer had jurisdiction to deny costs under Rules 400(1) and 400(3)
  3. 3 Whether Rule 409 or Rule 405 authorized vacating or reducing an award on assessment

Ratio Decidendi

The assessment officer lacked jurisdiction to deny costs under Rule 400(1) where the court had not exercised that jurisdiction; the officer must assess the bill within the limits of the judgment and the tariff, apply Tariff B4(2) rounding rules, and may exercise discretion to adjust units to achieve a reasonable result; applying those principles the bill was adjusted and allowed in part.

Court Disposition

Notice of Application struck as beyond jurisdiction and an abuse of process; Respondent's bill of costs assessed and allowed in part.

Orders

  • Notice of Application for judicial review struck with costs
  • Respondent's bill of costs assessed at $725.95