PRACTICE |
Costs |
Merck & Co. Inc. v. Apotex Inc.
T-2408-91
2002 FCT 1210, MacKay J.A.
22/11/02
19 pp.
Court found contempt of court committed by Apotex and Dr. Sherman--Parties directed to provide advice concerning appropriate lump sum for costs on solicitor-client basis-- Plaintiff proposed total bill of costs, for counsel fees and disbursements, for an amount of $2,290,066.70--Defendant proposed bill fixing costs at $822,776.70, or $825,000, less GST--Award of costs on solicitor and client basis intended to provide full indemnification of costs reasonably incurred--In fixing costs, Court must carefully consider costs claimed in relation to amount of work reasonably required-- Reasonableness evaluated in light of 5 factors--First, should reflect significance relevant factors included in Federal Court Rules, r. 400(3): result of proceeding, importance and complexity of proceeding and public interest--Second, claims for services of miscellaneous lawyers totalling some $31,000 in preparatory work for contempt proceeding not recoverable costs without explanation--In present case, no real explanation provided--Third, exclusion of costs claimed with inadequate explanation--Fourth, costs should include reasonable amounts for fees in light of services rendered within reasonable limits--Fifth, amount fixed should take account dual aspect of plaintiffs' role, not merely to support authority and dignity of Court but also to protect, preserve plaintiffs' own intellectual property interests--In present case, Merck costs included preparation time equivalent to more than 19 working months of 250 hours for preparation time for counsel for proceedings--Amount substantially in excess of reasonable costs--Costs reasonably incurred have upper limit--In circumstances, defendant should not have to pay unreasonable costs--Therefore, Court fixed costs at $1,500,000--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 400.