The plaintiff brought a motion opposing the confirmation of a certificate of assessment delivered by an assessment officer regarding his former lawyer's fees.
The plaintiff argued the assessment officer made unreasonable errors in principle, including findings about the termination of the retainer and the lawyer's hourly rates.
The court found no legal error, misapprehension of evidence, palpable factual error, or unreasonable assessment, noting that assessment officers are owed deference.
The motion was dismissed.
