Federal Courts Rules: Costs and Fees

Summary#

This is a proposed change to the Federal Courts Rules and the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules, published on February 11, 2023. The changes would simplify and raise the rules for court cost awards, add a charge for electronic copies saved to a portable device, and update the judicial title “prothonotary” to “associate judge.” Interested people had 60 days to comment after publication.

What it does#

• Changes to Tariff B (how the court calculates party-and-party costs):

  • Replace the single, complex table with four separate tables tailored to actions, applications, appeals, and motions.
  • Reduce the number of recovery columns from five to three and remove overlap between columns.
  • Add common line items that were previously missing (so more routine steps can be claimed).
  • Increase the tariff amounts overall by about 25% (the exact change depends on the case).
  • Remove fractional-unit rules and require rounding up to the next amount divisible by 10.
  • Make Column II the default column for tariff assessments unless the court orders otherwise.

• Changes to Tariff A (registry fees for copies):

  • When the Registry is asked to save a document or a digital recording onto a portable electronic storage device (for example, a USB stick), the requester would pay $15 per document/recording.
  • The existing print-copy charge of $0.40 per page would remain for paper copies. Electronic copies shared by email or cloud would not carry this $15 fee.

• Title update:

  • Replace the word “prothonotary” with “associate judge” throughout the Rules and the Immigration Rules to match the change made by Bill C-19 (which came into force on September 23, 2022).

• Timing and transitional rule:

  • The proposal says the amended rules would come into force one month after they are registered. The old Tariff B would still apply to judgments issued before the new rules come into force.

Who's affected#

• Parties and lawyers who bring or defend cases in the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal.
• People or organizations that ask the court Registry for saved copies of records or audio on a portable device (they would face the $15 charge).
• Taxation officers and court staff who calculate and assess costs under Tariff B.
• Litigants in areas where costs were often low under the old tariff — especially intellectual property and maritime/admiralty cases — because those areas were specifically noted as being under‑indemnified by the old tariff.
• Small businesses that appear in federal court (the government’s analysis says there is no new administrative burden on them, though outcomes in costs awards could affect them).

If it’s unclear who will be affected in a particular case, the Rules give the court discretion to choose whether to apply the tariff or a lump‑sum award.

Why it matters#

• Predictability: Raising and simplifying Tariff B aims to make tariff-based awards closer to what courts have been giving as lump sums. That should make outcomes more predictable for litigants and lawyers.
• Money at stake: For cases where the tariff is used, recoverable costs could be about 25% higher than under the old tariff. That matters if you expect to win costs or to be ordered to pay the other side’s costs.
• Access and convenience: The $15 fee for copies on a portable device could affect people who need physical copies rather than emailed or cloud-shared files. Electronic sharing by email/cloud would remain free under the proposal.
• Administrative clarity: Updating titles (from prothonotary to associate judge) and adding common assessable items should reduce confusion and make the costs regime easier for courts and litigants to use.

Note: These were proposed amendments (not final law) when published. The final text and exact effects would depend on responses to the consultation and any edits made before registration.