Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Taxation des dépens en faveur du demandeur, mais aucune somme n’est allouée pour des services taxables; seuls les débours raisonnables sont admis.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of an exclusion order against Mr. Maan, found the process fair, and ordered personal costs against counsel for non-attendance.
Assessment officer allowed costs according to Tariff B with itemized adjustments: accepted 21 units ($3,780) for assessable services (with item-specific unit allocations), disallowed taxes on assessable services absent evidence, adjusted taxes and disbursements to reflect British Columbia rates where supported, disallowed Item 24 claim for travel time by counsel due to lack of court direction, allowed reasonable and necessary second counsel travel and related disbursements based on evidence, and declined to determine or award post-judgment interest because that discretion rests with the Court.
Source excerpt
The appeal was quashed because the Commissioner had no legal duty under the OLA or Federal Courts Rules to sign and return the French acknowledgement card, the Federal Court correctly concluded the Commissioner acknowledged receipt by bilingual email and offered to correspond in the appellant's preferred language, the Part III, V and VII allegations lacked a reasonable prospect of success or adequate factual pleading, and the appellant's affidavit was inadmissible on a motion to strike.
Source excerpt
The tax officer applied column III of tariff B, allocated units individually using Rule 400(3) factors (primarily result of the proceeding, unnecessary measures and workload), allowed 23 units for taxable services (total $3,910), allowed GST $195.50 and QST $390.02 on those services, allowed $7.50 for printing, declined travel units and certain other claimed units, and concluded that post-judgment interest is payable under s.37(1) of the Federal Courts Act according to Quebec law but the tax officer will not fix rate or start date absent Court instruction.
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to establish error in the Federal Court’s denial of an extension of time to appeal the Associate Judge’s order, and the Federal Court correctly concluded that the Associate Judge did not err in striking the judicial review application as not reviewable; respondent awarded costs of $3,000.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court did not err in striking the appellant's originating pleading as disclosing no reasonable cause of action and as frivolous and vexatious; the notice of appeal reproduces no arguable error and the appeal is manifestly bound to fail, so the Court of Appeal struck the notice of appeal without leave to amend, granted the appellant permission to proceed unrepresented, and dismissed the appeal without costs.
Source excerpt
The Motion Judge correctly applied Rule 104(1)(b) and did not relax the test: the respondent’s legal interests would be inevitably affected because the action seeks determinations about the lawfulness of products it manufactured and because warranty claims by end users are likely; therefore adding the respondent as a defendant was necessary to effectually and completely determine the disputes. The appeal failed on the merits but succeeded insofar as the costs award was varied because costs had not previously been requested; costs are now awarded to the respondent.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court denied leave to file a late affidavit in a tax compliance-order application, finding the evidence could have been anticipated and would add little probative value.
The Court held that Rule 334.39's presumptive no-costs regime applied to the Hudson parties (and, given the stay and linkage, to Pierrot), no exceptions in Rule 334.39(1) were engaged, and under Rule 397(2) the Court would delete 'with costs' from its February 20, 2024 judgments and replace it with 'without costs'.
Source excerpt
Explore more
