Mud Engineering Inc. v. Secure Energy (Drilling Services) Inc.

Mud Engineering Inc. v. Secure Energy (Drilling Services) Inc.

The assessment officer allowed the majority of claimed assessable services after evaluating each item individually under the full range of Column III units and considering s.400(3) factors, but disallowed claims for second counsel fees and counsel travel (Items 14(b) and 24) because there was no express Court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2023 FC 770
Parties
Plaintiff: Mud Engineering Inc.; Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim: Secure Energy (Drilling Services) Inc.; Defendant: Secure Energy Services Inc.; Defendant by Counterclaim: An‑Ming (Victor) Wu
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property (patent) Costs Assessment / Assessment of Costs Following Judgment and Multiple Motions
Outcome
Secure's Bill of Costs assessed and allowed in the total amount of $119,628.28 payable by Mud Engineering Inc. to Secure Energy (Drilling Services) Inc. and Secure Energy Services Inc.
Legal Topics
Costs Assessment, Tariff B, Second Counsel and Travel Costs, Summary Trial, Motions to Strike
Source Language
english
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Federal Court Costs Costs Assessment Tariff B Second Counsel and Travel Costs Summary Trial Motions to Strike

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mud Engineering Inc.

Plaintiff

Secure Energy (Drilling Services) Inc.

Defendant; Plaintiff by Counterclaim

Secure Energy Services Inc.

Defendant

An‑Ming (Victor) Wu

Defendant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property (patent) Costs Assessment / Assessment of Costs Following Judgment and Multiple Motions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be assessed under Column III of Tariff B
  2. 2 Whether assessable services claimed at the high end of Column III are justified
  3. 3 Whether an assessment officer has authority to assess second counsel fees and counsel travel (Items 14(b) and 24) absent a court direction

Ratio Decidendi

The assessment officer allowed the majority of claimed assessable services after evaluating each item individually under the full range of Column III units and considering s.400(3) factors, but disallowed claims for second counsel fees and counsel travel (Items 14(b) and 24) because there was no express Court direction authorizing assessment of those items and an assessment officer lacks jurisdiction to assess them absent such direction; disbursements were allowed as reasonable and verifiable.

Court Disposition

Secure's Bill of Costs assessed and allowed in the total amount of $119,628.28 payable by Mud Engineering Inc. to Secure Energy (Drilling Services) Inc. and Secure Energy Services Inc.

Orders

  • Secure's Bill of Costs assessed and allowed in the total amount of $119,628.28
  • Assessable services allowed: 214.10 units totaling $35,968.80 (inclusive of GST)