Lominadze v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-4616-97
Smith A.O.
2/7/98
13 pp.
Motions Judge awarding costs of motion, characterized as frivolous, to applicant on solicitor and client basis-Respondent objecting to hourly rate claimed, given narrow, simple issues and industry standard-Must be careful to avoid fixating on hourly rates-While quantification commensurate with counsel's experience, competence helpful to arrive at amount for which party should properly be compensated, should not be applied at exclusion of other relevant factors such as volume of work, amount of time spent, amount of money involved, importance, complexity of issues, result achieved-Solicitor-client assessment relying exclusively on quantification of costs using hourly rate bereft of fairness, reasonableness in process of determining extent to which losing party should indemnify winning party for work required to perform-Solicitor and client costs intended to provide complete indemnity for costs essential to and arising within four corners of litigation: Re Solicitors, [1967] 2 O.R. 137 (H.C.)-While issues herein quite important, neither especially complex nor requiring inordinate amount of work-Assessment Officer not convinced to depart from approach of full indemnity, but reducing claims for items found to be extraneous to respondent's motion to strike affidavit filed in support of applicant's originating motion for judicial review-$8,000 lump sum claimed as premium to instructing solicitor for achievement of good, conclusive, and binding result and importance of result to client with respect to preventing problems in Court with such motions as affecting instructing solicitor, refused as extra service which, in absence of special order, not reasonably necessary in defending respondent's motion-As simple, straightforward assessment, presence of two counsel unnecessary-Lump sum fee of $3,500 for attendance reduced to $875.