Canada Judgment

Federal Court

Savard v. Canada

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Units claimed under specific Tariff B items were reduced where no justification was provided; item 27 denied as the Tariff does not provide for preparing the hearing record; disbursements supported by affidavit were allowed; applying s.400(3) and Tariff B yields fees of $4,561.34 and disbursements of $630.39, total $5,191.73.

Court disposition

Defendant's costs assessed and allowed in the amount of $5,191.73.

Orders

  • Fees awarded to defendant: $4,561.34
  • Disbursements awarded to defendant: $630.39
  • Claim for item 27 (preparing the hearing record) denied

02

Material facts

Parties

JEAN-GUY SAVARD

Plaintiff

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Defendant Counsel: John Sims

Amounts and remedies

  • Fees Awarded: CAD 4,561.34
  • Disbursements Awarded: CAD 630.39
  • Total Costs Awarded: CAD 5,191.73

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Liability / Assessment of Costs

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The defendant sought allowance of claimed legal fees under specified Tariff B items and disbursements totalling $630.39, relying on recorded time and affidavit evidence for disbursements.
Respondent
The plaintiff challenged the maximum number of units claimed under multiple Tariff B items, argued lack of justification for those units and contended that Tariff items are not multiplied for multiple counsel; also contested compensation for preparing the hearing record (item 27).

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Federal Court Rules, subsection 400(3)

    Assessment governed by the criteria in subsection 400(3) of the Federal Court Rules.

  2. 02

    Tariff B (Federal Court Rules) / Assessment officer interpretation

    Tariff B items are intended to be partial compensation for services specified; absent an order, each item compensates the service regardless of number of counsel.

  3. 03

    Assessment practice under Federal Court Rules

    Compensation for services not enumerated in the Tariff is rarely awarded.

  4. 04

    Federal Court practice and affidavit evidence in record

    Disbursements must be necessary and supported by affidavit or evidence.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Units claimed under specific Tariff B items were reduced where no justification was provided; item 27 denied as the Tariff does not provide for preparing the hearing record; disbursements supported by affidavit were allowed; applying s.400(3) and Tariff B yields fees of $4,561.34 and disbursements of $630.39, total $5,191.73.

Obiter and limits

  • The financial means of a party are irrelevant to the quantum determination at assessment stage.
  • If Parliament intended to compensate a service it would have created a Tariff item for it.
  • The Tariff is partial compensation and not a full indemnity.

Court disposition

Defendant's costs assessed and allowed in the amount of $5,191.73.

  • Fees awarded to defendant: $4,561.34
  • Disbursements awarded to defendant: $630.39
  • Claim for item 27 (preparing the hearing record) denied

Source and reliance status

Federal Court · 2 March 2005

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.

Source document

Federal Court

Judgment· 2 March 2005

2005 FC 312

Savard v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2005-03-02 Neutral citation 2005 FC 312 File numbers T-59-01 Decision Content Date: 20050302 Docket: T-59-01 Citation: 2005 FC 312 Between: JEAN-GUY SAVARD Plaintiff and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER [1] This action was dismissed on May 29, 2003, with costs against the defendant. At her request, the assessment proceeded on the basis of written submissions by the parties. [2] After reviewing the proceedings in the record and the submissions by the parties, the defendant's fees are awarded in the amount of $4,561.34 for the following reasons. [3] The number of units claimed under the following items was reduced: items 2 (6 units), 7 (4 units), 10 (5 units), 11 (2 units x 1h32min), 12 (2 units), 13(a) (4 units), 14(a) (2 units x 3h12min) and 26 (3 units). The defendant made no submission justifying the maximum number of units provided under column III of Tariff B for these services. Taking into account the criteria set out in subsection 400(3) of the Federal Court Rules, it seems that this action in civil liability was not in general very complex although the workload appears to have been considerable. In response to the plaintiff's argument, I should like to note that unless the Court so orders each item of the Tariff is intended to compensate for counsel's fees for services rendered regardless of the number of counsel who took part in performing each service. [4] For the preparation of written submissions in October (1.5 pages) and December (2 pages) 2001 in response to motions by

the plaintiff, I allow 4 units for each of the claims made under item 5. Compared to the other services, the workload for these items seems lighter. [5] The claim made under item 27 for preparing the hearing record is denied. Compensation under that item for services not provided for in the Tariff is very rarely awarded: for example, the filing of written submissions pursuant to rule 382 against a status review notice. Several items of the present Tariff are related to services rendered prior to the hearing. If Parliament had intended to compensate for this service, there would be an item to that effect. We must keep in mind that the Tariff is intended to be partial compensation for fees incurred by a party in a case. [6] The disbursements for photocopying and service expenses, totalling $630.39, are awarded as claimed. These expenses, evidence of which was established by affidavit, were necessary to the proper conduct of the case. [7] Finally, the fact that a party has the financial means to pay costs is not relevant at this stage of the proceedings. The Court has ordered that the costs be paid by the plaintiff, and my role as assessment officer is to determine the amount. Consequently, the defendant's costs are assessed and allowed in the amount of $5,191.73. (signed) Michelle Lamy

MICHELLE LAMY

ASSESSMENT OFFICER Certified true translation K. A. Harvey

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: T-59-01 Between: JEAN-GUY SAVARD Plaintiff and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Montréal, Quebec REASONS OF: MICHELLE LAMY, ASSESSMENT OFFICER DATED: March 2, 2005 SOLICITORS OF RECORD: John Sims For the defendant Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Federal Court Rules, subsection 400(3)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Federal Court Rules, rule 382

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Tariff B (Federal Court Rules)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.