Pictou v. Canada
Because the appellants did not file any materials in response and the assessment officer must assess costs neutrally while being bound by the judgment, Rules and tariff, the respondent's bill of costs was reasonable and is allowed as presented in the amount of $4,998.64.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2005 FCA 3
- Parties
- Appellant: Vaugh Pictou; Appellant: Roderick A. Googoo; Appellant: Edward Googoo; Appellant: Jo Ann Toney-Thorpe; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 5 January 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Tax (gst) / Assessment of Costs
- Outcome
- Respondent's bill of costs assessed and allowed in full; appeals previously dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Goods and Services Tax, Status Indian Exemption, Costs Assessment
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Vaugh Pictou
Appellant
Roderick A. Googoo
Appellant
Edward Googoo
Appellant
Jo Ann Toney-Thorpe
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Tax (gst) / Assessment of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether registered status Indians were required to collect and remit GST on sales to non‑Indian customers at their retail outlets
- 2 Whether the respondent's bill of costs was reasonable and should be allowed in full given no response from the appellants
Ratio Decidendi
Because the appellants did not file any materials in response and the assessment officer must assess costs neutrally while being bound by the judgment, Rules and tariff, the respondent's bill of costs was reasonable and is allowed as presented in the amount of $4,998.64.
Court Disposition
Respondent's bill of costs assessed and allowed in full; appeals previously dismissed.
Orders
- Respondent awarded costs in the amount of $4,998.64 to be paid by the appellants
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Pictou v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2005-01-05 Neutral citation 2005 FCA 3 File numbers A-423-00, A-424-00, A-425-00, A-426-00 Decision Content Date: 20050105 Docket: A-423-00, A-424-00, A-425-00, A-426-00 Citation: 2005 FCA 3 BETWEEN: Vaugh Pictou Roderick A. Googoo Edward Googoo Jo Ann Toney-Thorpe Appellants -and- Her Majesty the Queen Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS FRANÇOIS PILON Assessment Officer [1] The fundamental issue in these appeals was whether the appellants, who are registered status Indians, were required to collect and remit Goods and Service Tax on sales to non-Indian customers at their retail outlets. The four appeals were dismissed with one set of costs. I issued a timetable for the written disposition of the respondent's bill of costs. [2] The appellants did not file any materials in response. In such circumstances the assessment officer must determine the reasonableness of each item claimed in the bill of costs from a position of neutrality, although he/she is also bound by the judgment, the Rules and the tariff. In the present litigation the respondent's bill of costs is assessed and allowed as presented at $4,998.64. Halifax, Nova Scotia January 5, 2005 François Pilon Assessment Officer FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-423-00; A-424-00; A-425-00; A-426-00 STYLE OF CAUSE: Vaughn Pictou, Roderick A. Googoo, Edward Googoo, Jo Ann Toney-Thorpe Appellants -and- Her Majesty the Queen Respondent ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF PARTIES PLACE OF ASSESSMENT: Halifax, Nova Scotia ASSESSMENT OF COSTS - REASONS BY: FRANÇOIS PILON, ASSESSMENT OFFICER DATED: January 5, 2005 SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Burchell Hayman Halifax, NS for the Appellants John Sims Deputy Attorney General Ottawa, Ontario for the Respondent