Federal Court Decisions

Date: 20070927

Docket: T-1309-05

Citation: 2007 FC 973

BETWEEN:

CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Applicant

and

TOMASZ WINNICKI

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Charles E. Stinson

Assessment Officer

[1]               The Court found the Respondent in contempt, sentenced him to nine months' imprisonment and ordered him to pay solicitor-client costs. The Federal Court of Appeal reduced the term of his sentence, but left the award of costs undisturbed. I issued a timetable for written disposition of the assessment of the Applicant's bill of costs.

[2]               The Respondent did not file any materials in response to the Applicant's materials. My view, often expressed in comparable circumstances, is that the Federal Courts Rules do not contemplate a litigant benefiting by having an assessment officer step away from a neutral position to act as the litigant's advocate in challenging given items in a bill of costs. However, the assessment officer cannot certify unlawful items, i.e. those outside the authority of the judgment and the tariff. I examined each item claimed in the bill of costs and the supporting materials within those parameters. The bill of costs was prepared further to Column V of Tariff B. I am not convinced that Column V necessarily approximates solicitor-client costs, but its resultant amount may be appropriate in given circumstances: see Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Ahmed, [2005] F.C.J. No. 1427 (A.O.)

[3]               The Court's disposition of the initial motion for issuance of a show cause order reserved the matter of costs to the judge presiding over the contempt hearing. Contempt proceedings are criminal or quasi-criminal in nature and require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that the claimed amount of $18,788.81 is arguably reasonable for the work required by this proceeding and I allow it as presented.

"Charles E. Stinson"

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          T-1309-05

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          CHRC v. TOMASZ WINNICKI

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS IN WRITING WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES

REASONS FOR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:                    CHARLES E. STINSON

DATED:                                                                                 September 27, 2007

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: