|
|
|
Ottawa, 9 August 1993
|
|
Taxation Order CRTC: 1993-6
|
|
In re: British Columbia Telephone Company - 1992 Construction Program Review - Telecom Decision CRTC 92-21 and Telecom Costs Order CRTC 93-3
|
|
Carolyn McCool for the B.C. Old Age Pensioners' Organization, the Council of Senior Citizens' Organizations, West End Seniors' Network, Senior Citizens' Association, Federated Anti-Poverty Groups of B.C. and Local 217 IWA Seniors (BCOAPO et al.).
|
|
Michael Redmond for BC TEL.
|
|
TAXATION OF COSTS OF BCOAPO ET AL.
|
|
Taxing Officer: David Elder
|
This order constitutes the taxation of costs awarded to the BCOAPO et al. in the case of British Columbia Telephone Company - 1992 Construction Program Review, Telecom Decision CRTC 92-21, 27 November 1992 (Decision 92-21)
|
Costs were awarded to BCOAPO et al. by Telecom Costs Order CRTC 93-3 (Costs Order 93-3), in accordance with subsection 44(1) of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure.
|
|
BCOAPO et al. submitted a Bill of Costs in the amount of $5,183.16, consisting of $5,079.50 in fees and $103.66 in disbursements. With respect to counsel fees, BCOAPO et al. claimed, for senior counsel, 4 hours of preparation at an hourly rate of $205/hour and one half day of attendance at the review meeting at the rate of $1,260 per diem. For junior counsel, BCOAPO et al. claimed 20 hours of preparation at $105/hour and 2.3 days attendance at $665 per diem.
|
In its answer to the Bill of Costs filed by BCOAPO et al., BC TEL noted that the counsel fees claimed were at the same rates as those allowed in Taxation Order 1993-2. The company further noted that in that Order, which dealt with costs incurred in connection with Competition in the Provision of Public Long Distance Voice Telephone Services and Related Resale and Sharing Issues, Telecom Decision CRTC 92-12, 12 June 1992 (Decision 92-12), the Taxing Officer allowed a higher rate for preparation time than for attendance time due to the scope and complexity of the proceeding. BC TEL submitted that the CPR in question was a routine hearing with none of the special hallmarks of the proceeding which led to Decision 92-12, and argued that accordingly, the rates allowed in the current proceeding should be less than those allowed in Taxation Order 1993-2. BC TEL did not object to the amount of time claimed by BCOAPO et al. for preparation or attendance.
|
|
In its reply, BCOAPO et al. stated that the rates billed for counsel were entirely proper and were indeed modest as compared with fees charged by other lawyers with similar levels of experience and ability.
|
As a starting point, I note that both counsel for BCOAPO et al. also participated in the 1990 BC TEL CPR. In Taxation Order 1991-1, the Taxing Officer allowed, in effect, rates of $190/hour for preparation and $1,125 per diem for attendance for senior counsel, and a preparation rate of $95 hour for junior counsel.
|
For their participation in the proceeding leading to Decision 92-12 (which occurred approximately one year following the 1990 BC TEL CPR) these same counsel were allowed rates of $205/hour preparation and $1,260 per diem and $105/hour, respectively. As noted by the company, the Taxing Officer in Taxation Order 1993-2 allowed a higher rate for preparation than attendance due to the scope and complexity of the proceeding. I also note that the taxing officer allowed a modest increase to the attendance rate for the same reasons.
|
All things being equal, in my view it would not be appropriate to allow the same counsel rates for this CPR proceeding as for the proceeding which led to Decision 92-12, since the rates allowed for the latter were adjusted upwards to take into account the unusual scope and complexity of that proceeding.
|
At the same time, I am mindful of the fact that the 1992 CPR took place approximately one year after the proceeding which lead to Decision 92-12 commenced, and consider it appropriate that some allowance be made for inflation and experience. In my view the increment for experience should be proportionately greater for junior counsel, in recognition of the steepness of the learning curve for junior counsel and the resulting incremental value of the added experience.
|
|
In the circumstances, for senior counsel I will allow rates of $200/hour for preparation and $1,190 per diem for attendance. For junior counsel, I will allow the rates claimed, namely $105/hour for preparation and $665 per diem for attendance.
|
|
I will allow the preparation and attendance time and disbursements as claimed.
|
|
Costs as Taxed
|
|
I hereby tax the fees and disbursements as follows:
|
|
Fees
|
|
Richard J. Gathercole
Preparation $ 800.00
Attendance $ 595.00
|
|
W. Anita Braha
Preparation $2,100.00
Attendance $1,529.50
|
|
Sub-total $5,024.50
|
|
Disbursements
|
|
Photocopies $ 67.67
Fax $ 4.53
Postage $ 21.51
Telephone $ 1.70
Parking $ 4.50
Courier $ 3.75
Sub-total $ 103.66
|
|
Total Fees and Disbursements $5,128.16
|
|
David Elder
Legal Counsel
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
|
|
|