Canada Case Law

Barnes v. Knox Inc.

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The appeal is dismissed because the Appellant failed to demonstrate a denial of natural justice: the Adjudicator lawfully exercised discretion to exclude irrelevant or self‑serving witness evidence, the lawyer met the onus to prove the reasonableness of the account, and the proceeding required review for fairness rather than a rehearing of factual findings.

Source excerpt

• Natural justice
• Taxation of solicitor's account
• Admissibility and relevance of witness evidence
• Standard for appeals from small claims court

Read case analysis

Landry v. The Band Council of the Abénakis of Wôlinak

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

Assessment officer allowed selected units within Column III based on Rule 400(3) factors and avoidance of double indemnification: Item 18 allowed (1 unit); Item 19 allowed at six units; Item 20 allowed (1 unit); Item 22 and Item 25 disallowed due to double recovery from concurrent file; Item 26 allowed at three units (reduced for duplication); Item 27 disallowed for lack of necessity; photocopies $75 allowed; total assessed and certified at $1,807.50.

Source excerpt

• Costs
• Tariff b column iii
• Federal court rules
• Assessment officer
• Double indemnification
• Judicial review

Read case analysis

C.J.B. v. A.R.B.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Costs were assessed after trial in a family law proceeding, with the claimant awarded pre-trial costs and the respondent awarded trial costs, subject to set-off.

• Property division
• Parenting
• Spousal support
• Child support
• Costs assessment
• Disbursements

Read case analysis

Bank of Montreal v. Zimmer

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Costs assessment in a foreclosure matter. The Registrar allowed some tariff units and disbursements, but reduced the bill, disallowed out-of-town travel, and denied costs for the assessment hearing.

• Foreclosure
• Bill of costs
• Scale of costs
• Disbursements
• Travel costs
• Expert appraisal

Read case analysis

Bacardi & Company Ltd. v. Havana Club Holdings S.A.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

Because the assessment was not contested, the assessment officer allowed the respondent's claimed costs as calculated under the tariff, granted two units under section 26 in each file and applied the half reduction under item 28 for services by an articling law student, and issued certificates of assessment reflecting those amounts.

Source excerpt

• Costs
• Tariff
• Assessment officer
• Gst/pst
• Articling law student fee reduction

Read case analysis

Savard v. Canada

Court

Federal Court

Federal Court assessment of costs awarded the defendant $5,191.73, after reducing several Tariff B fee claims and allowing supported disbursements.

• Costs
• Tariff b
• Disbursements
• Assessment officer decision
• Tariff-b
• Assessment-of-costs

Read case analysis

Lavigne v. Canada Post Corporation

Court

Federal Court

Assessment of costs after the plaintiff’s Federal Court action was struck for lack of jurisdiction; the defendant was awarded taxed costs and disbursements.

• Privacy act s.7
• Federal court jurisdiction
• Collective agreement age discrimination
• Charter s.15 equality
• Costs assessment
• Rule 223 discovery

Read case analysis

Archambault v. Canada

Court

Federal Court

Assessment of costs in which the defendant’s fees were allowed, while claimed disbursements were rejected for lack of proof under Tariff B.

• Disbursements
• Photocopy costs
• Transcript costs
• Tariff b unit value increase
• Certificate of costs
• Costs-assessment

Read case analysis

Interbox Promotion Corporation v. 2428-0414 Québec Inc.

Court

Federal Court

Assessment of costs after default judgment in which the plaintiff’s bill of costs was largely allowed, including investigator expenses, photocopying, bailiff costs, and a certificate for $1,552.57.

• Costs
• Disbursements
• Default judgment
• Assessable services
• Investigators' fees
• Default-judgment

Read case analysis

Zundel v. Citron

Court

Federal Court

Assessment Officer Pace assessed the Simon Wiesenthal Centre’s bill of costs at $2,074.85 and declined to defer assessment pending appeal.

• Costs assessment
• Deferral pending appeal
• Disbursements
• Tariff units
• Costs-assessment
• Deferral-pending-appeal

Read case analysis