I am one of those rare consumers that looks passed the total due on a bill. Sadly, far too often I try to figure out a bill and cannot even guess what I am being charged for. Sometimes it seems that the information I need is not available and what’s written on the bill is intentionally unclear. The scant detail put into many invoices and receipts by experts is not enough for litigators who rely on them.
Why not? Once the smoke clears, a winner is crowned and one party is left licking its wounds, one of the biggest wounds is often a costs award. A substantial portion of many costs awards is devoted to disbursements including expert opinions, translation costs, etc. Not surprisingly, cost awards are often subject to scrutiny and litigation.
In Abbot Laboratories,[1] a Federal Court assessment officer considered costs for patent translations. The costs were granted for a reduced amount because the respondent failed to provide sufficient evidence. The assessment officer was not sure whether some translated documents were translated by an expert or by the respondent. Similarly, at paragraph 147 the Court noted that due to “obscurity of the evidence” it would only allow $2,100 out of a claim for $2,903 costs for translation.
So, when you assist a litigator, don’t let your evidence be obscure. For translators invoices, this might mean identifying translated documents by title and identifying a law firm’s file number for each translation task.[2] For lawyers, this will likely mean reviewing bills as they come in and ensuring that they are clear about what is being charged for. Once you win your client's case, these bits of paper become key evidence.
Endnotes:
Endnotes:
- Abbott Laboratories v. Canada (Health), 2008 FC 693 (CanLII) at paragraphs 132 and 147.
- This is consistent with a later decision by the same assessment officer: Astrazeneca AB v. Apotex Inc., 2009 FC 822 (CanLII).
No comments:
Post a Comment