Canadian Pacific Forest Products Ltd. v. Termar Navigation Co.
T-1719-91
Rothstein J.
23/3/98
9 pp.
In maritime law matter where amount at issue approximately $640,000, plaintiffs, successful in action, sought sum of $369,015.08 ($288,330.47 in fees and $80,684.61 in disbursements), later reduced by $10,000, representing costs on solicitor and client basis-No justification for relatively straightforward case taking eight years to get to trial-No apparent reason why solicitor and client costs seem to be out of proportion to amount at issue-Counsel have obligation to bring cases forward on efficient and timely basis-Ultimately, case was decided on interpretation of contractual documents-Nothing particularly creative or otherwise extraordinary about arguments-Criteria for moving to column IV of Part II of Tariff B: did one party make simple case complex, adopt dilatory tactics or unnecessarily lengthen duration of proceedings?: Sanmammas Compania Maritima S. A. et al. v. Ship Neptuno et al. (1995), 102 F.T.R. 181 (F.C.T.D.)-Both parties herein made relatively simple case complex-No evidence of dilatory tactics-Not justifiable to move to column IV of Tariff-While plaintiffs' offer of settlement of April 10, 1992 not referring to precise amount (general average contribution calculated on basis of amounts claimed as special charges being brought into average adjustment as general average expenditures), amount ascertainable and constituting offer within R. 344.1-No reason why open-ended offer not remaining open indefinitely-Offer not revoked, remained open until May 12, 1997 when plaintiffs increased offer to US$100,000-Each offer more favourable to defendants than judgment at trial-Plaintiffs therefore entitled to doubling of costs, from April 10, 1992 excluding disbursements, in accordance with R. 344.1-Plaintffs awarded $50,000, doubled to $100,000, minus $5,000 for fees not subject to doubling as relating to period prior to April 10, 1992-Total fees $95,000-Bill of costs claiming $80,684.61 reduced to $36,477.71 after certain disbursements disallowed-Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, R. 344.1 (as enacted by SOR/94-41, s. 3).