Two Costs Awards On Parallel Motions at the Federal Court of Appeal
Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc. v. Peak Innovations Inc. 2009 FCA 202 (Preston, Assessment Officer)

June 15, 2009

Kenneth D. McKay for the Appellant, Simpson Strong-Tie Company, Inc.
Paul Smith and Lawrence Chan for the Respondent, Peak Innovations Inc.

This was an assessment for two related awards of costs triggered by a motion to strike the Notice of Appeal where the Court granted costs to the Respondent.

While the Assessment Officer noted that the two parallel motions and orders were “for all intents and purposes identical” and that a doubling of costs should be avoided, no particular item was reduced explicitly on that basis. The Assessment Officer issued identical analysis for the two motions.

In the assessment, the fact that the motion was heard in writing was not determinative of a reduced rate but a lower number of allowable units was permitted on the basis that the materials filed were brief. Quicklaw, fax and courier costs were held not be normal office overhead and were subsequently allowed.

The Assessment Officer also held that he did not have jurisdiction to award costs for the assessment without a direction to that effect from the Court.

By: Alan Macek, Dimock Stratton LLP