In Cole v R, 2024 TCC 64, The Appellant spent the better part of ten years trying to convince the Minister of National Revenue to remove over $240,000 added to her taxable income for the 2011 taxation year. Due…
Time out
Joel Nitikman, in “Just the Fax Ma’am: A day late and a dollar short? A comment on Popovich” Tax Topics No 2074 (May 7, 2024), discusses in some detail Popovich v R, 2024 TCC 44, which analyzes the rules for…
Costs against appellant in “unwinnable appeal”
In Nixon v R, 2024 TCC 4, the Court awarded costs of about $165,000 against the appellant for, among other things, misleading the Court about key facts, refusing to admit key facts and filing “an unwinnable appeal” (paras 20ff).
Fair market value is a fact
In R v Preston, 2023 FCA 178, rev’g 2021 TCC 79, the court (per Monaghan JA) held that fair market value was a fact that could be pleaded by the Crown as an assumption.
No accountant privilege
In Gaudreau c R, 2023 CCI 115, the Court was willing to consider the argument that an accountant’s planning memorandum need not be produced on discovery because it was not relevant. After duly considering the matter, the Court concluded the…
Corporate appellants need lawyers
The following article was published by the Canadian Tax Foundation. “John Loukidelis, “Corporate Appellants Need Lawyers” (2021) 21:2 Tax for the Owner-Manager 13-14″ In Canada v. BCS Group Business Services Inc. (2020 FCA 205), the FCA held that a lawyer…
Tax Court settlements
In McKenzie v R, 2012 TCC 329, the court held that a settlement offer must include a “degree of compromise” of the offeror’s position. A waiver of legal fees by itself isn’t enough to earn an entitlement to enhanced costs.…
Corporate Appellants Need Lawyers
“In Canada v BCS Group Business Services Inc. (2020 FCA 205), the FCA held that a lawyer must represent a corporate appellant in a TCC general procedure appeal.” John Loukidelis “Corporate Appellants Need Lawyers” Tax for the Owner-Manager 21:2 (April…
Oral evidence
In Osinski v R, 2013 TCC 71, the Court wrote: 20 With respect to both parties, the law in my opinion is simply as stated in C. (R.) v McDougall, C. (R.), … 2008 SCC 53, above by Justice Rothstein…
Mail room case
In Luxury Home Landscape Construction Inc. v R, 2021 TCC 4, a GST informal procedure “mail room” case, the Minister brought a motion to quash the appeal because it was supposedly late-filed. The Court dismissed the motion and ordered the appeal set down for a hearing because the Minister failed to prove that it had sent a notice of confirmation in a timely manner.