Canada Case Law

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

Clorox Company of Canada, Ltd. v. Chloretec S.E.C

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The assessment officer allowed costs in a total amount of $6,501.46 payable by The Clorox Company of Canada, Ltd. to Chloretec S.E.C.; Item 16(a) was disallowed because the appeal was commenced by notice of appeal; units were fixed individually (Item 19: 6 units; Item 22(a): 3 units per hour for 3 hours = 9 units; Item 25: 1 unit; Item 26: 3 units; Item 27: 2 units); in-house photocopy/printing disbursements were allowed as a lump sum of $1,000 (using $0.25/page principle where appropriate), process server fees $739.30, messenger fees $74.99, travel $1,065.46; claimed GST and QST on counsel i…

Source excerpt

• Costs assessment
• Tariff b
• Federal court rules
• Disbursements
• Photocopy rates
• Process server fees

Read case analysis

Bertrand v. Acho Dene Koe First Nation

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court assessed costs after a judicial review was discontinued, allowing several Tariff B items in part and awarding the respondent $4,736.28 plus disbursements.

• Costs assessment
• Discontinuance
• Interim injunction motion
• Tariff b
• Federal court rules
• Costs-assessment

Read case analysis

Safe Gaming System Inc. v. Atlantic Lottery Corporation

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court refused to defer costs pending appeal and awarded the defendants a lump sum of $1,175,000, inclusive of fees, disbursements, interest and taxes.

• Costs award
• Lump sum costs
• Security for costs
• Settlement offers
• Federal court rules
• Appeal

Read case analysis

Canada (National Revenue) v. Vallelonga

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court found Rosario Vallelonga in contempt for failing to comply with an order to produce tax-related information and documents, and imposed a fine, costs, and conditional imprisonment.

• Contempt of court
• Compliance orders
• Federal court rules
• Income tax act disclosure
• Contempt-of-court
• Tax-law

Read case analysis

Nesathurai v. Canada (National Revenue)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court assessed party-and-party costs after RFIs were quashed, allowing most claimed units and disbursements but disallowing some items under Tariff B.

• Requests for information
• Assessment of costs
• Federal court rules
• Tariff b
• Disbursements
• Discovery

Read case analysis

Plante v. Entreprises Réal Caron ltée

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed an interlocutory motion to strike a judicial review application and related exhibits, holding that such merits-based relief is exceptional.

• Judicial review
• Motion to dismiss
• Striking evidence
• Federal court rules
• Judicial-review
• Motion-to-dismiss

Read case analysis

Donaghy v. Scotia Capital Inc.

Court

Federal Court

Application under PIPEDA dismissed; the Court fixed costs to the Respondent at $10,437.13 and ordered correction of the Respondent’s Staff Plan form.

• Personal information protection and electronic documents act
• Costs awards
• Disclosure
• Admissibility of evidence
• Settlement offers
• Federal court rules

Read case analysis

Canadian Council For Refugees v. Canada

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed LEAF’s motion to intervene in a refugee judicial review, finding it would add no unique evidence or position and was already represented.

• Intervention
• Standing
• Public interest litigation
• Federal court rules
• Costs
• Federal-court-rules

Read case analysis

South Yukon Forest Corporation v. Canada

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The motions judge erred by requiring a written consent to be filed before joinder and by treating the assignment issue as merely peripheral; LPL was a necessary party because if the alleged assignment to South Yukon were ineffective full recovery would require LPL's participation; the oral indication of consent and common solicitors sufficed or the court could have ordered consent to be filed; the Judge improperly used Rule 397(2) to alter an unambiguous Order; accordingly the appeal is allowed, the orders set aside in part, and the joinder and full amendments are permitted.

Source excerpt

• Joinder
• Amendment of pleadings
• Assignment of causes of action
• Breach of contract
• Federal court rules
• Clerical correction (rule 397)

Read case analysis