Supreme Court Docket Update

Awaiting Judgment

  • Minister of National Revenue v. Duncan Thompson. The case was heard on December 4, 2014, and a webcast is available. This is an appeal from Thompson v. Canada (National Revenue) (2013 FCA 197). This decision pertains to the issue of whether a lawyer subject to enforcement proceedings can claim solicitor-client privilege over his accounts receivable. A short summary of the case is available here.

Leave Granted

  • Attorney General of Canada, et al. v. Chambre des notaires du Québec, et al. Scheduled to be heard on November 3, 2015 (tentative date). A motion for leave to intervene filed by the Canadian Bar Association, the Federation of Canadian Law Societies, the Advocates’ Society, and the Criminal Lawyers Association was granted. This is an appeal from Canada (Procureur général) c. Chambre des notaires du Québec (2014 QCCA 552). Leave sought by the Department of Justice and granted with costs on December 18, 2014. This decision pertains to whether subsection 231.2(1) and section 231.7, together with the exception set out in the definition of “solicitor-client privilege” in subsection 232(1), are unconstitutional vis-à-vis notaries and lawyers in Quebec on the basis that these provisions are contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. A short summary of the case is available here.

Leave Sought by the Department of Justice

  • None.

Leave Sought by the Taxpayer

  • The Jean Coutu Group (PJC) Inc. v. Attorney General of Canada, et al. (from 2015 QCCA 838). This case pertains to a motion for rectification and to what extent a taxpayer can retroactively revisit documentation giving effect to a series of transactions when unforeseen tax consequences have resulted following the SCC’s decision in Quebec (Agence du revenu) v. Services Environnementaux AES inc. (2013 SCC 65). (See the article by Nathalie Perron elsewhere in this issue.)

  • Eleanor Martin v. The Queen (from 2015 FCA 95). This case pertains to the TCC’s discretion to award costs in excess of the relevant tariff amount pursuant to the Tax Court of Canada Rules (general procedure) in respect of, among other things, the CRA’s conduct prior to the appeal.

  • Paul Matthew Johnson v. The Queen (from 2015 FCA 52 and 2015 FCA 51). Leave sought on April 23, 2015. This case pertains to the dismissal of a judicial review application made by the taxpayer on the alleged misconduct of the minister in assessing and collecting net tax under the Excise Tax Act. The case also pertains to the decision by the TCC to strike certain paragraphs from the taxpayer’s notice of appeal pertaining to this alleged misconduct.

  • ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp. v. Minister of National Revenue (from 2014 FCA 297). Leave sought on February 13, 2015. This case pertains to a dispute between the taxpayer and the CRA with regard to whether a notice of reassessment was mailed to the taxpayer, the subsequent presumed late filing of a notice of objection, and whether the proper forum for such a debate is the TCC or the FC.

Leave Dismissed

  • Lyrtech RD Inc. v. The Queen (from 2014 CAF 267). Leave sought by the taxpayer, dismissed with costs on July 9, 2015. This case pertains to the denial of SR & ED tax credits because of the loss of CCPC status as per paragraph 125(7)(a) and on the basis of de facto control. A short summary of the case is available here.

  • Attorney General of Canada v. Jean-Marc Poulin de Courval, in His Capacity as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Sylvain Girard (from 2014 QCCA 358). Leave sought by the attorney general of Canada, dismissed with costs on April 30, 2015. This case pertains to whether, in the context of bankruptcy, a notice of assessment constitutes a proceeding in view of recovery of a provable claim pursuant to sections 69.3 and 69.4 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. A short summary of the case is available here.

  • Humanics Institute v. Minister of National Revenue (from 2014 FCA 265). Leave sought by the taxpayer, dismissed with costs on April 23, 2015. This case pertains to the refusal by the minister of a charitable registration to the taxpayer; procedural fairness; and sections 2(a), 2(b), and 15 of the Charter. A short summary of the case is available here.

Marie-France Dompierre
Deloitte Tax Law LLP, Montreal
[email protected]

Canadian Tax Focus
Volume 5, Number 3, August 2015
©2015, Canadian Tax Foundation