ARCHIVED - Telecom Taxation Order CRTC 2002-2

Telecom Taxation Order CRTC 2002-2

Ottawa, 19 April 2002

Costs awarded to Action Réseau Consommateur et al.
- Public Notice CRTC 2001-37

Reference: 8678-C12-11/01, 8624-B20-01/00 and 4768-098

Philippa Lawson for the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) representing Action Réseau Consommateur (ARC), the Consumers' Association of Canada, Fédération des Associations coopératives d'économie familiale and the National Anti-Poverty Organization (ARC et al.)

Taxation of costs of ARC et al.

Taxing officer: James Wilson

1.

This order constitutes the taxation of costs awarded to ARC et al. in the proceeding initiated by Price cap review and related issues, Public Notice CRTC 2001-37, 13 March 2001.

2.

Costs were awarded to ARC et al. pursuant to Action Réseau Consommateur et al. application for costs - Price cap review proceeding, Telecom Costs Order CRTC 2002-2, 1 March 2002 (Costs Order 2002-2), in accordance with section 44 of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure.

3.

By letter dated 5 March 2002, ARC et al. submitted a bill of costs claiming a total amount of $168,731.91 in fees for their legal counsel, a total of $600 in fees for their legal assistant, a total of $3,428 for their in-house analysts, a total of $106,244.39 for their consultants, and a total of $17,348.12 in disbursements. ARC et al.'s claim included the Federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) on fees and disbursements less the rebate to which ARC et al. is entitled in connection with GST.

Disbursements

4.

In its comments dated 19 March 2002, TELUS Communications Inc. (TCI) objected to the disbursement of $1,603.86 claimed by ARC et al. for the planned appearance of its consultant, Ms. Alexander at the oral hearing. TCI submitted that none of the parties participating in the oral hearing wanted to cross-examine Ms. Alexander, and as a result Ms. Alexander did not appear at the oral hearing. TCI submitted, therefore, that ARC et al. should not be permitted to recover the $1,603.86 claimed for Ms. Alexander's airplane ticket.

5.

In its reply comments, ARC et al. pointed out that the decision by TCI and other parties not to cross-examine Ms. Alexander was made the day before she was scheduled to travel to the hearing. According to ARC et al., Ms. Alexander had purchased a non-refundable ticket in order to attend the hearing and was unable to obtain a refund following the last-minute cancellation of her appearance.

6.

I note that section 26 of the Legal Directorate's Guidelines for the Taxation of Costs (the Guidelines) sets out the expectation that, in respect of air travel, persons purchase a discounted ticket, if available, and that such tickets should be purchased as far in advance as possible in order to fully benefit from the discounts available.

7.

I accept that the ticket in question was a discounted ticket, as contemplated by the Guidelines. I find that Ms. Alexander's actions in purchasing such a ticket were appropriate under these circumstances. I accept that Ms. Alexander's appearance at the oral hearing was cancelled at the last minute, which prevented ARC et al. from receiving either a partial or full refund of this disbursement.

8.

I find therefore that this disbursement claim by ARC et al. is appropriate.

9.

In addition to the $1,603.86 claimed for Ms. Alexander's air travel costs, ARC et al. claimed air travel costs of $652.29 for its consultant, John Todd, and $1,322.37 for the air travel costs of its consultant, Dr. Trevor Roycroft. ARC et al. also claimed $52.50 for intra-city car travel costs incurred by Dr. Roycroft. Additionally, ARC et al. submitted a claim for $67.06 for inter-city car travel costs incurred by its analyst, Mr. Sebastien. ARC et al. claimed a total of $44.12 for parking. A total of $706.34 was claimed in connection with hotel expenses incurred by Mr. Todd and Dr. Roycroft. $96.00 was claimed in respect of meal allowances for Mr. Todd, and ARC et al. claimed a total of $426.76 for working meals. ARC et al. also claimed $1,761.30 for in-house photocopies, and $1,048.86 for postage/courier costs. ARC et al. claimed $485.90 for long distance/fax costs, and $8,999.77 for transcripts. I find these amounts reasonable and will allow the amounts claimed. The total disbursements allowed amount to $17,348.12.

Counsel, consultant and analyst fees

10.

ARC et al. claimed legal fees of $93,460.50, $10,164.74 and $65,106.67 for their lawyers, Ms. Philippa Lawson, Mr. Michael Janigan, and Mr. Greg Van Koughnett, respectively. These amounts represent 516 hours for Ms. Lawson at a rate of $175 per hour, 42.7 hours for Mr. Janigan at a rate of $230 per hour, and 273.5 hours for Mr. Van Koughnett at a rate of $230 per hour.

11.

I note that the rates claimed are in accordance with the rates specified in the Guidelines. I accept the rates and time claimed as appropriate.

12.

ARC et al. claimed fees of $600 for their legal assistant, Ms. Westcott. This amount represents 4 days at a rate of $150 per day.

13.

In these circumstances, I find the rate and time claimed to be appropriate.

14.

ARC et al. claimed fees of $1,028, $1,200 and $1,200 for their analysts, Mr. Jean Sebastien, Ms. Louise Tardif and Ms. Melissa Fritz, respectively. These amounts represent 2.57 days for Mr. Sebastien at a rate of $400 per day, 3 days for Ms. Tardif at a rate of $400 per day, and 3 days for Ms. Fritz at a rate of $400 per day.

15.

In these circumstances, I find the rates and time claimed to be appropriate.

16.

ARC et al. claimed fees of $53,449.99, $18,981.90, $20,512.50 and $13,300 for their consultants, Mr. Todd, Ms. Gail Morrison, Dr. Roycroft, and Ms. Alexander. These amounts represent 295.1 hours for Mr. Todd at a rate of $175 per hour, 104.8 hours for Ms. Morrison at a rate of $175 per hour, 113.5 hours and 0.5 days for Dr. Roycroft at a rate of $175 per hour and $1,300 per day, respectively, and 76 hours for Ms. Alexander at a rate of $175 per hour.

17.

I note that the rates claimed are in accordance with the rates specified in the Guidelines. I accept the rates and time claimed as appropriate.

Costs as taxed

18.

I hereby tax the fees and disbursements, including GST, where applicable, as follows:

Legal counsel fees

Ms. Lawson

$93,460.50

Mr. Janigan

$10,164.74

Mr. Van Koughnett

$65,106.67

Legal assistant fees

Ms. Westcott

$600.00

Analysts fees

Mr. Sebastien

$1,028.00

Ms. Tardif

$1,200.00

Ms. Fritz

$1,200.00

Consultants/Expert witnesses fees

Mr. Todd

$53,449.99

Ms. Morrison

$18,981.90

Dr. Roycroft

$20,512.50

Ms. Alexander

$13,300.00

Total fees

$279,004.30

Total disbursements

$17,348.12

Total payable

$296,352.42

Pursuant to Costs Order 2002-2, the respondents are to pay the costs as taxed forthwith.

Taxing officer

James Wilson

Secretary General

This document is available in alternative format upon request and may also be examined at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca