The Plaintiff applied for a review of a reduction in a Foreclosure Bill of Costs, as proposed by the Assessment Officer pursuant to Rules 9.35(1) and 10.41.

The Master refused to modify the Assessment Officer’s determination, for two reasons. First, Rule 9.35(4) requires that attendance in front of a Master take place before a Foreclosure Order has been entered. Here, out of necessity, the Order had already been entered to facilitate the closing of a sale to a third party purchaser. Master Smart indicated that this situation was one of the practical difficulties arising from the new Rules. 

Second, the Bill of Costs had been presented to the Assessment Officer on a without notice basis. The Master applied Rule 10.37, pointing out that notice of the Assessment had to be given unless there had been consent to the Bill of Costs.

The Court also noted that the practice of the Assessment Officer had not been to issue a Certificate for an Assessment, but rather to return the Bill of Costs with a cover sheet setting out what she would be prepared to allow. Master Smart determined that, although not technically correct, the substance of the Assessment Officer’s practice conformed with Rule 10.43.