Rules Amending the Federal Courts Rules and the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules: SOR/2025-232

Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 159, Number 25

Registration
SOR/2025-232 November 21, 2025

FEDERAL COURTS ACT
CITIZENSHIP ACT
IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE PROTECTION ACT

P.C. 2025-812 November 21, 2025

The rules committee of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court makes the annexed Rules Amending the Federal Courts Rules and the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules under

Ottawa, October 20, 2025

John B. Laskin
Chair
Rules committee of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court

Whereas, under paragraph 46(4)(a)footnote g of the Federal Courts Act footnote b, a copy of the proposed Rules Amending the Federal Courts Rules and the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules was published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on February 11, 2023 and interested persons were invited to make representations concerning the proposed Rules;

Therefore, Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, under section 46footnote a of the Federal Courts Act footnote b, section 22.3footnote c of the Citizenship Act footnote d and subsection 75(1)footnote e of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act footnote f, approves the annexed Rules Amending the Federal Courts Rules and the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules made by the rules committee of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.

Rules Amending the Federal Courts Rules and the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules

Federal Courts Act

Federal Courts Rules

1 The long title of the Federal Courts Rules footnote 1 is replaced by the following:

Federal Courts Rules

2 Rule 1 of the Rules and the heading before it are repealed.

3 Rule 1.1 of the Rules is renumbered as Rule 1.

4 Subsection 400(5) of the Rules is replaced by the following:

Directions

(5) If the Court orders that costs be assessed in accordance with Tariff B, the Court may direct that the assessment be performed under one or more columns of the applicable tables to that Tariff.

5 Rule 407 of the Rules is replaced by the following:

Party-and-party costs

407 Unless the Court orders otherwise, party-and-party costs shall be assessed in accordance with column 2 of the applicable tables to Tariff B.

6 Subsection 1(2) of Tariff B to the Rules is replaced by the following:

Content

(2) A bill of costs shall indicate each assessable service, the applicable tables to this Tariff, the applicable columns and the number of units sought in accordance with those tables and, if the service is assessable based on a number of hours, it shall indicate the number of hours claimed and be supported by evidence of those hours.

7 Subsection 2(2) of Tariff B to the Rules is repealed.

8 Subsection 4(2) of Tariff B to the Rules is replaced by the following:

Rounding of result

(2) If a calculation under subsection (1) results in an amount that is not a multiple of 10, the resulting amount shall be rounded to the next higher amount that is a multiple of 10.

9 The table to Tariff B to the Rules is replaced by the following:

TABLE 1

Actions
Item Assessable Service Number of Units
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
1 Preparation and filing of statement of claim, statement of defence, statement of defence and counterclaim, defence to counterclaim, reply and defence to counterclaim, third party claim, defence to third party claim or statement of the issues on a reference 3–7 6–10 9–13
2 Preparation and filing of reply 1–3 4–6 7–9
3 Preparation and filing of notice of constitutional question 1–3 4–6 7–9
4 Review of notice of constitutional question 1–3 1–5 1–7
5 Preparation and filing of written representations for status review or, if requested by the Court, for case management 1 1 1
6 Preparation and delivery of demand for particulars 1–3 1–6 1–9
7 Preparation and delivery of particulars 1–3 1–5 1–7
8 Amendment to pleading if necessitated by a new or amended pleading of another party 1–3 3–5 6–8
9 Preparation and issuance of documents related to the arrest of property, including an Affidavit to Lead Warrant 1–3 1–5 1–7
10 Preparation and issuance of caveat release or release of arrested property 1 1 1
11 Preparation and delivery of discovery plans that are ordered or directed by the Court, including amendments to those plans 2–4 4–6 6–10
12 Preparation and delivery of claims charts that are ordered or directed by the Court 2–4 4–6 6–10
13 Preparation and delivery of list of documents in accordance with rule 295, and production of those documents 2–4 4–6 6–10
14 Preparation and delivery of affidavit of documents and production of the first 500 documents identified in Schedule 1 to Form 223 1–5 5–9 9–15
15 Production of each additional grouping of up to 1,000 documents identified in Schedule 1 to Form 223, to a maximum of 10 groupings 1–5 5–9 9–15
16 Review of documents produced by another party — first 500 documents 1–3 3–5 6–8
17 Review of documents produced by another party — each additional grouping of up to 1,000 documents, to a maximum of 10 groupings 1–3 3–5 6–8
18 Inspection of documents in accordance with subsection 228(1) 1–3 1–3 1–3
19 Preparation and filing of pre-trial conference materials, including requisition for pre-trial conference and pre-trial conference memorandum 1–3 1–5 1–7
20 Preparation for conference, including a case management conference, pre-trial conference or trial management conference 1–2 3–6 7–11
21 Attendance at case management conference, pre-trial conference or trial management conference, for each hour (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 1–3
22 Preparation and delivery of request to admit facts or documents 1–3 2–4 4–6
23 Preparation and delivery of response to request to admit facts or documents 1–3 2–4 4–6
24 Preparation for examination, including examination for discovery, examination for trial out of court or examination in aid of execution, for each individual examined 1–3 1–5 1–11
25 Attendance at examination, including examination for discovery, examination for trial out of court or examination in aid of execution, for each hour (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–5 1–7
26 Preparation of answers to undertakings, for each witness 1–3 1–7 1–9
27 Review of answers to undertakings of other parties, for each witness 1–3 1–5 1–7
28 Provision of instructions to expert witness and review of supporting expert witness affidavit, for each affidavit 1–5 3–9 5–15
29 Review of opposing party’s expert witness affidavit, for each affidavit 1–5 1–9 1–15
30 Consultation related to inspection of property in accordance with rule 249, including joint testing, under an order of the Court, and attendance at the joint testing 1–3 1–7 1–13
31 Preparation and filing of trial record 1–3 1–3 1–3
32 Preparation and filing of joint book requested or permitted by the Court 1–3 3–5 5–9
33 Preparation and filing of condensed book, compendium or other similar written material requested or permitted by the Court 1–3 2–4 3–5
34 Preparation for hearing of trial, whether or not the trial proceeds, including correspondence, preparation of witnesses, issuance of subpoenas and other services not otherwise specified in this Tariff 1–5 4–8 7–11
35 Preparation for hearing of trial, for each day or part of day in Court after the first day in Court 1 1–3 4–8
36 Counsel fee for attendance of first counsel at hearing of trial, for each hour in Court (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 3–5
37 Counsel fee for attendance of second counsel at hearing of trial, for each hour in Court, 50% of the units per hour allocated under item 36 (for each quarter hour or less, add 12.5% of the units per hour allocated under item 36)      
38 Preparation of affidavit required by these Rules or directed by the Court and used at trial, for each affidavit 1–5 3–5 5–7
39 Preparation and filing of written representations requested or permitted by the Court 1–3 1–7 1–11
40 Attendance at a reference, accounting or other similar procedure not otherwise specified in this Tariff, for each hour (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–5 1–9
41 Travel by counsel to attend examination, conference or hearing, at the discretion of the Court 1–3 1–5 1–9
42 Services after judgment not otherwise specified in this Tariff 1 1 1
43 Assessment of costs 1–5 3–7 6–10
44 Any other service allowed by the assessment officer or ordered by the Court 1 1–3 1–5

TABLE 2

Applications
Item Assessable Service Number of Units
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
1 Preparation and filing of notice of application 1–3 3–5 5–7
2 Preparation and filing of notice of appearance 1 1 1
3 Preparation and filing of notice of constitutional question 1–3 4–6 7–9
4 Review of notice of constitutional question 1–3 1–5 1–7
5 Preparation and filing of written representations for status review or, if requested by the Court, for case management 1 1 1
6 Preparation for conference, including case management conference or pre-hearing conference 1–2 3–6 7–11
7 Attendance at conference, including case management conference or pre-hearing conference, for each hour (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 1–3
8 Review of certified tribunal record 1–3 3–5 5–7
9 Preparation and filing of written material for an objection under subsection 318(2) filed as directed by the Court, at the discretion of the Court 1–3 1–3 1–3
10 Provision of instructions to expert witness and review of supporting expert witness affidavit, for each affidavit 1–5 3–9 5–15
11 Preparation and service of other supporting witness affidavits, for each affidavit 1–5 3–5 5–7
12 Preparation related to cross-examination of each expert witness 1–3 4–6 7–11
13 Preparation related to cross-examination of each witness other than expert witness 1–3 3–5 5–7
14 Attendance at cross-examination of witness, for each hour (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 1–5
15 Preparation and filing of record, including memorandum of fact and law 1–7 6–10 11–15
16 Preparation and filing of requisition for hearing 1 1 1
17 Preparation for hearing of application, whether or not the application proceeds 1–5 4–8 7–11
18 Preparation for hearing of application, for each day or part of day in Court after the first day in Court 1 1–3 4–8
19 Counsel fee for attendance of first counsel at hearing of application, for each hour in Court (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 3–5
20 Counsel fee for attendance of second counsel at hearing of application, for each hour in Court, 50% of the units per hour allocated under item 19 (for each quarter hour or less, add 12.5% of the units per hour allocated under item 19)      
21 Preparation and filing of any other written representations requested or permitted by the Court 1–3 1–7 1–11
22 Preparation and filing of a condensed book, compendium or other similar written material requested or permitted by the Court 1–3 2–4 3–5
23 Travel by counsel to attend examination, conference or hearing, at the discretion of the Court 1–3 1–5 1–9
24 Services after judgment not otherwise specified in this Tariff 1 1 1
25 Assessment of costs 1–5 3–7 6–10
26 Any other service allowed by the assessment officer or ordered by the Court 1 1–3 1–5

TABLE 3

Appeals
Item Assessable Service Number of Units
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
1 Preparation and filing of notice of appeal or notice of cross-appeal 1–3 3–5 5–7
2 Preparation and filing of notice of appearance 1 1 1
3 Preparation and filing of notice of constitutional question 1–3 4–6 7–9
4 Review of notice of constitutional question 1–3 1–5 1–7
5 Preparation and filing of written representations for status review or, if requested by the Court, for case management 1 1 1
6 Agreement on the contents of the appeal book 1–3 1–3 1–3
7 Preparation of appeal book 1 2 3
8 Preparation for case management conference 1–2 3–6 7–11
9 Attendance at case management conference, for each hour (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 1–3
10 Preparation and filing of memorandum of fact and law 1–7 6–10 11–15
11 Preparation and filing of requisition for hearing 1 1 1
12 Preparation and filing of books of authorities 1–3 2–4 5–7
13 Preparation for hearing of appeal, whether or not the appeal proceeds 1–5 4–8 7–11
14 Preparation for hearing of appeal, for each day or part of day in Court after the first day in Court 1 1–3 4–8
15 Counsel fee for attendance of first counsel at hearing of appeal, for each hour in Court (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 3–5
16 Counsel fee for attendance of second counsel at hearing of appeal, for each hour in Court, 50% of the units per hour allocated under item 15 (for each quarter hour or less, add 12.5% of the units per hour allocated under item 15)      
17 Preparation and filing of other written representations requested or permitted by the Court 1–3 1–7 1–11
18 Preparation and filing of condensed book, compendium or other similar written material requested or permitted by the Court 1–3 2–4 3–5
19 Travel by counsel to attend case management conference or hearing of appeal, at the discretion of the Court 1–3 1–5 1–9
20 Services after judgment not otherwise specified in this Tariff 1 1 1
21 Assessment of costs 1–5 3–7 6–10
22 Any other service allowed by the assessment officer or ordered by the Court 1 1–3 1–5

TABLE 4

Motions
Item Assessable Service Number of Units
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
1 Preparation and filing of notice of motion, other than one included in motion record 1–3 1–3 1–5
2 Provision of instructions to expert witness and review of supporting expert witness affidavit, for each affidavit 1–5 3–9 5–15
3 Preparation and service of other supporting witness affidavits, for each affidavit 1–3 1–5 1–7
4 Preparation in relation to cross-examination of each expert witness 1–3 4–6 7–11
5 Preparation in relation to cross-examination of each witness other than expert witness 1–3 3–5 5–7
6 Attendance at cross-examination of witness, for each hour (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 1–5
7 Preparation and filing of motion record of moving party, including preparation of written representations or memorandum of fact and law 1–5 1–7 1–9
8 Preparation and filing of motion record of responding party, including preparation of written representations or memorandum of fact and law 1–5 1–7 1–9
9 Preparation and filing of moving party’s reply on a motion in writing 1–3 1–3 1–3
10 Preparation for hearing of motion lasting more than three hours, for each additional three-hour period or part of such period 1–3 3–5 5–7
11 Counsel fee for attendance of first counsel at hearing of motion, for each hour in Court (for each quarter hour or less, add 25% of the units allocated for each hour) 1–3 1–3 3–5
12 Counsel fee for attendance of second counsel at hearing of motion lasting more than three hours, for each hour in Court, 50% of the units per hour allocated under item 11 (for each quarter hour or less, add 12.5% of the units per hour allocated under item 11)      
13 Travel by counsel to attend hearing of motion or crossexamination, at the discretion of the Court 1–3 1–5 1–9
14 Assessment of costs 1–5 3–7 6–10
15 Any other service allowed by the assessment officer or ordered by the Court 1 1–3 1–5

10 The Rules are amended by replacing “prothonotary” and “prothonotaries” with “associate judge” and “associate judges”, respectively, in the following provisions:

11 The English version of the Rules is amended by replacing “prothonotary” with “associate judge” in the following provisions:

Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules

12 The Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules footnote 2 are amended by replacing “prothonotary” with “associate judge” in the following provisions:

Transitional Provision

13 Tariff B to the Federal Courts Rules, as it read immediately before the day on which these Rules come into force, continues to apply in respect of costs that are awarded in an order that is made by the Court, as defined in rule 2 of those Rules, before that day.

Coming into Force

14 These Rules come into force on the day that, in the first month after the month in which they are registered, has the same calendar number as the day on which they are registered or, if that first month has no day with that number, the last day of that first month.

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Rules.)

Issues

There is a need to amend the Federal Courts Rules (the Rules) and the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules (the Immigration Rules) to address the following issues:

  1. In the Rules, the Tariff B structure for the calculation of costs awards is too complex, is missing some common procedural steps, and provides insufficient indemnification upon an award of costs by the Court. As a result, in many cases, the Court does not refer the parties for a calculation of costs when issuing a costs order, but instead awards costs on a “lump sum” basis, resulting in less predictability for litigants regarding costs awards.
  2. The Rules and the Immigration Rules still refer to certain judicial officers as “prothonotary,” a title which was changed to “associate judge” in the Federal Courts Act, resulting in an inconsistency.

Background

The Rules Committee of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court (the Rules Committee) is a statutory committee created under section 45.1 of the Federal Courts Act (the Act) to make, amend or revoke rules, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council. The Citizenship Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act also provide that the Rules Committee established under the Act may make rules, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council. The Rules Committee includes the Chief Justice and three other judges of the Federal Court of Appeal; the Chief Justice or Associate Chief Justice, five other judges and one associate judge of the Federal Court; the Chief Administrator of the Courts Administration Service; five members from the bar; and the Attorney General of Canada or a representative thereof. These committee members all consult with their respective stakeholder groups, whether in the private sector, public sector or courts, regarding proposals for rule amendments.

Amendments to Tariff B (costs awards)

Even if the Court decides in favour of a party on the merits of the case, there is no automatic entitlement for that party to recover any of its litigation expenses (referred to as “costs”) from the opposing party. Costs are always within the discretion of the Court, pursuant to subsection 400(1) of the Rules: “The Court shall have full discretionary power over the amount and allocation of costs and the determination of by whom they are to be paid.” The Rules provide, at Tariff B, a fee structure that may be used, at the discretion of the Court, if it issues an order that one party is entitled to the recovery of some of its litigation expenses, which are then payable by the opposing party. If the Court issues an order granting a party the right to recover its litigation costs according to Tariff B, that party then submits a bill of costs to be assessed by an assessment officer. For each assessable service, the applicable column sets out a range of units that can be claimed. The unit value is set each year based on a formula in the Rules. For many years, it has been recognized that costs awards that are based on Tariff B fall far short of the actual litigation costs incurred by parties, particularly in certain commercial or business practice areas such as intellectual property or maritime law. As a result, there has been an increasing trend, particularly in these commercial cases, for the Court not to rely on Tariff B when issuing a costs award, but instead to issue a “lump sum” award.

In October 2011, the Rules Committee struck a subcommittee to conduct a global review of the Rules. Different constituencies and their perspectives were represented: the Courts, court personnel and lawyers specializing in different areas of both private practice and government practice. Through the subcommittee’s consultative process, other constituencies and their perspectives were given a voice as well. See the Global Review of the Federal Courts Rules – A Discussion Paper (PDF), May 2012.

The subcommittee tendered its final report on October 16, 2012. See the Report of the Subcommittee on Global Review of the Federal Courts Rules (PDF).

Among other things, the Report recommended that the provisions in the Rules relating to costs “should be amended in order to make it more likely that a higher quantum of costs will be awarded when warranted, to provide greater incentive for pre-trial resolution” (Recommendation 4(b)).

In November 2014, the Rules Committee struck a new subcommittee to examine the approach to costs awards, survey other jurisdictions and make specific recommendations for amendments. In October 2015, the Rules Committee published a discussion paper that was shared throughout the legal community to invite feedback on the research conducted by the subcommittee. See the Discussion Paper (Review of the Rules on Costs) (PDF), October 5, 2015.

The subcommittee reviewed the extensive public feedback and developed policy proposals, which were then discussed at the June 3, 2016, meeting of the Rules Committee. The Rules Committee agreed to the following: simplify Tariff B (three columns instead of five); add extra items that are missing in the tariff; and increase the tariff by approximately 25%.

The subcommittee then developed a detailed proposal for the new tariff structure for review at the November 29, 2019, meeting of the Rules Committee, which endorsed the draft structure for the purposes of consultation with members of the wider legal community in 2020. Following the review of the extensive comments received, the subcommittee developed a draft amendment package that was approved by the Rules Committee at its meeting of June 17, 2022.

Amendment to judicial officer title (from “prothonotary” to “associate judge”)

The Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 1 replaced references to “prothonotary” (a judicial officer of the Federal Court) with “associate judge” in legislation, including the Act and the Judges Act. This change came into force on September 23, 2022, as per P.C. 2022-1013. The word “prothonotary” appears throughout the Rules and the Immigration Rules. The rule amendments change the term “prothonotary” to “associate judge” to be consistent with the legislation.

Objective

Amendments to Tariff B (costs awards)

The 2012 policy work of the Rules Committee led to a recommendation that the Rules relating to costs “be amended in order to make it more likely that a higher quantum of costs will be awarded when warranted, to provide greater incentive for pre-trial resolution” (as per the Report of the Subcommittee on Global Review of the Federal Courts Rules (PDF)).

The Rules Committee concluded that the balance (between predictability and discretion) should be shifted further towards predictability, and that the tariff regime should be maintained. It determined that the closer the tariff gets to providing a full indemnification, the more likely it will be followed by judges and the more predictable costs will be. The previous tariff was considered particularly inadequate in intellectual property litigation, but also in admiralty and maritime law proceedings. And so, in many cases, the Court did not rely on the tariff, but instead awarded a lump sum. The Rules Committee concluded that Tariff B should be retained but simplified; several new services, which form part of regular litigation practice, should be added; and overall, costs awards under the tariff should be raised by approximately 25%. The Court could then award tariff-based costs that more closely match a lump sum award, providing a more consistent and predictable regime. However, the Court retains full discretionary power over whether to order costs using the tariff or a lump sum.

Amendment to judicial officer title (from “prothonotary” to “associate judge”)

These changes are required for consistency with recent statutory amendments.

Description

The amendments to the Rules and the Immigration Rules are set out below.

Amendments to Tariff B (costs awards)

The table of assessable services in Tariff B is amended as follows:

The previous table had, for each assessable service, only a narrow range of units that were nearly all single digits (e.g. three to seven units), and with some ranges starting at zero units. As a result, it was not feasible to increase a given range strictly by 25%. Although the amendments to the tariff will result in overall increases by approximately 25% in assessed costs, these increases will not be uniform and will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. In rare cases, applying the new tariff will not have any effect on the results of an assessment, and in other cases, the increase could be higher. As part of the restructuring and overall tariff increase, there is now also an option for fractional units to be assessed (subsection 2(2) of Tariff B to the Rules is therefore repealed). For the calculation of the unit value, the result is now to be rounded to the next higher amount (rather than the next lower amount) that is a multiple of 10.

Subsection 400(5) of the Rules is amended to refer to the “applicable tables” rather than simply to the “table,” given that the new tariff structure includes a table for each proceeding type (actions, applications, appeals and motions), rather than a single table covering all types. There is a corresponding change as well to subsection 1(2) of Tariff B to make reference to the new tariff structure with multiple tables.

Further, as the new structure contains three rather than five columns, the default column is column 2. Accordingly, the phrase “column III” in section 407 of the Rules is amended to read “column 2.”

Amendment to judicial officer title (from “prothonotary” to “associate judge”)

The title “prothonotary” is changed to “associate judge” throughout the Rules and the Immigration Rules.

Regulatory development

Consultation

In October 2015, the Rules Committee published a Discussion Paper (Review of the Rules on Costs) (PDF) that was shared throughout the legal community to invite feedback on the research conducted by the subcommittee.

Comments were received from over a dozen individuals and organizations, including

Following a review of the comments, the Rules Committee made policy decisions regarding the project, and the subcommittee then developed a detailed proposal for the new tariff structure for review by the Rules Committee at its meeting on November 29, 2019. The Rules Committee endorsed the draft structure to be circulated for further public consultation in 2020 to members of the Bench and Bar Liaison Committees of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court. In response, extensive comments were received from the following organizations:

These comments were then considered in the development of the draft amendments that were proposed for prepublication in the Canada Gazette, Part I. The proposed Rules Amending the Federal Courts Rules and the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on February 11, 2023, followed by a 60-day comment period, in accordance with subsection 46(4) of the Act.

Amendments to Tariff B (costs awards)

A limited number of comments were received regarding the amendments proposed to Tariff B. These comments fell into two main categories:

Modifications were made to address these comments. Examples of changes that increase clarity, readability and consistency with terminology used in the legislation include

In addition, changes were made to ensure consistency across the four tables in the attribution of unit ranges for comparable assessable services. Examples include

Amendment to judicial officer title (from “prothonotary” to “associate judge”)

No comments were received regarding the proposed change in title from “prothonotary” to “associate judge” during the 60-day comment period that followed the Canada Gazette, Part I, publication.

Amendment to Tariff A

During the drafting process prior to publication in the Canada Gazette, Part I, a minor amendment to Tariff A of the Rules was proposed to establish a fee for instances where the registry is asked to provide a copy of a Court document on a portable electronic storage device. Although this amendment was initially considered useful, it has since been determined that the change is no longer necessary given evolving practices within the registries of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court. As a result, the amendment that had been proposed to Tariff A has been withdrawn.

With the above-noted revisions, the Rules amendments were approved by the Rules Committee on July 4, 2025.

Indigenous engagement, consultation and modern treaty obligations

The amendments have no impact on modern treaty obligations. The amendments are intended to improve the efficiency and consistency of the Rules and the Immigration Rules while ensuring access to justice for all litigants in the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court, including litigants who are First Nations, MĂ©tis, or Inuit.

Instrument choice

Amendments to the Rules and the Immigration Rules are necessary to modify Tariff B and to replace the reference to “prothonotary” with “associate judge” in the relevant provisions. Using a regulatory instrument is the only option to achieve this. Therefore, no other instruments were considered.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

There are limited implementation costs related to the amendments, which are associated with preparing the following: (i) public communications (notice regarding the coming into force of the amendments) to parties and the profession as well as to members of the Courts and registries; (ii) updated guidelines for litigants; and (iii) training for Court assessment officers, who have the primary role of assessing costs following a Court decision. Additional analysis is provided below regarding benefits and costs specific to the amendments.

Tariff B amendments (costs awards)

For many years, it has been recognized that costs awards based on Tariff B fall far short of the actual litigation costs incurred by parties, particularly in certain commercial or business practice areas such as intellectual property or maritime law. As a result, there has been an increasing trend, particularly in these commercial cases, for the Court not to rely on Tariff B when issuing a costs award, but instead to issue a “lump sum” award.

This widespread “lump sum” practice therefore forms a baseline for the new tariff structure. The amendments will increase Tariff B costs awards by approximately 25%, thereby aligning the tariff more closely with the amounts typically awarded under the “lump sum” approach. This will help address the shortfall in tariff-based costs awards and provide a more consistent and predictable regime. Nevertheless, the Court retains full discretionary power over the amount and allocation of costs and the determination of who must pay these costs. Accordingly, it is not possible to determine the number of cases where tariff-based rather than lump sum costs will be awarded, or the number of cases where the amount of the award will increase on account of the new tariff structure. As a result, a monetized benefits and costs assessment is not feasible. However, it is acknowledged qualitatively that these changes could result in increased costs for some parties.

The amendments to the tariff provide a streamlined format that will make the tariff easier to use both for litigants as well as assessment officers.

Small business lens

Small businesses can sue or be sued by the federal Crown in Federal Court, with appeals to the Federal Court of Appeal; sue or be sued by other small businesses in areas of federal jurisdiction (e.g. maritime law or intellectual property matters); or seek judicial review of decisions of federal boards, commissions and other tribunals. Depending on the outcome of such proceedings and the Court’s decision on costs, such a small business may then be either entitled to reimbursement of their own costs or liable for the opposing party’s costs, according to either a lump sum award or the costs regime available under Tariff B. Analysis under the small business lens, however, concluded that the amendments will not directly impact Canadian small businesses, as there is no change in administrative or compliance requirements. It should be noted, however, that small businesses may benefit from the improved clarity of the amended tariff structure.

One-for-one rule

The requirements of the Rules and the Immigration Rules do not meet the definition of administrative burden as set out in the Red Tape Reduction Act; therefore, the one-for-one rule does not apply.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The amendments are not related to a work plan or commitment under a formal regulatory cooperation forum.

Although there is policy alignment between the amendments and the initiatives in the courts of certain provinces in Canada, it is noted that each province has adopted a unique framework for indemnification of litigation costs that fits within their particular civil rules of procedure. Therefore, there are differences in each jurisdiction’s implementation of particular procedural rules, even though there may be general policy alignment.

In studying approaches to the indemnification of costs, the subcommittee examined the costs regimes of all the provinces.

International obligations

The amendments are not related to an international agreement or obligation.

Effects on the environment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment, a preliminary scan concluded that a strategic environmental assessment is not required.

Gender-based analysis plus

The amendments are intended to improve the efficiency and consistency of the Rules and the Immigration Rules while ensuring access to justice for litigants in the Federal Court of Appeal and Federal Court, including litigants who fall within the gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) analytic framework. No groups are expected to be disproportionately impacted by the amendments.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

The amended Rules and the Immigration Rules will come into force one month after they are registered.

Contact

Dominique Henrie
Secretary of the Rules Committee of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0H9
Email: information@fct-cf.ca