Yao Tsai Co. v. Dic Dac Holdings ( Canada ) Ltd.
T-996-95
Stinson T.O.
6/6/96
18 pp.
Taxation of defendants' amended bill of party and party costs-Plaintiff raising preliminary objection under R. 346.1-Defendants' bill of costs framed under amended Tariff-Plaintiff's action in relation to trade mark infringement and passing-off-Seeking injunctive relief by motion but requesting adjournment for cross-examination-Other delays and omissions occasioned by plaintiff to defendants' detriment-July 28, 1995, Judge ordering stay of proceedings sine die until plaintiff pays defendants' party and party costs and thereafter files application record-Defendants sending solicitor for plaintiff draft bill of costs in old format in July 1995-No response-Wrote again in September asking for payment-No response-Defendants obtaining appointment for taxation in March 1996 and filing draft bill of costs under new Tariff effective September 1, 1995-R. 344(4) embracing liquidated figure for costs-Judge's order not "fixing liquidated" amount therefore circumstances not fitting first exception in R. 346.1(1)-Relative to second exception in R. 346.1(1) and not first exception that plaintiff's tardiness becomes factor-Plaintiff could have paid amount under old Tariff or applied for taxation prior to September 1, 1995-Old Tariff would have applied-But because of transitional language in R. 346(1), new Tariff available to defendants-Seriousness and complexity of litigation govern range in Tariff-This case neither simplest nor most complex litigation-Fixed percentage not applied throughout-Each item assessed in own circumstances-Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, RR. 344, 346.1 (as am. by SOR/95-282, s. 4).