International Longshore and Warehouse Union v. Harris

International Longshore and Warehouse Union v. Harris

Because the respondent had notice under the Rules and failed to participate, the assessment proceeded; the assessment officer examined each item against the authority of the judgment and the tariff and allowed the full amount claimed as it was arguable within tariff limits.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2002 FCA 162
Parties
Applicant: International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Ship and Dock Foreman, Local 514; Respondent: Empire International Stevedores Ltd.; Respondent: William Harris
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review; Assessment of Costs / Assessment of Costs
Outcome
Applicant awarded costs of $5,602.88 against Respondent William Harris.
Legal Topics
Costs Assessment, Tariff Limits, Notice to Respondent, Neutrality of Assessment Officer
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Costs Costs Assessment Tariff Limits Notice to Respondent Neutrality of Assessment Officer

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Ship and Dock Foreman, Local 514

Applicant

Empire International Stevedores Ltd.

Respondent

William Harris

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review; Assessment of Costs / Assessment of Costs

  1. 1 Whether assessment of costs may proceed where respondent's solicitor declines to participate
  2. 2 Whether an assessment officer may abandon neutrality and act as an advocate for a litigant
  3. 3 Whether an assessment officer may certify items outside the authority of the judgment and the tariff

Ratio Decidendi

Because the respondent had notice under the Rules and failed to participate, the assessment proceeded; the assessment officer examined each item against the authority of the judgment and the tariff and allowed the full amount claimed as it was arguable within tariff limits.

Court Disposition

Applicant awarded costs of $5,602.88 against Respondent William Harris.

Orders

  • Applicant's bill of costs presented at $5,602.88 is assessed and allowed at $5,602.88 as against the Respondent, William Harris.