Settlement agreement binding as representative signing agreement had capacity on behalf of taxpayers

Federal appeal | Tax | Income tax | Administration and enforcement

Settlements. Taxpayers were involved in film production and were part of group that included four associated master limited partnerships (MLPs) and several production services limited partnerships (PLPs). Settlement agreement was entered into between Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and representative for MLPs and related PLPs, but focused on SH MLP. Minister of National Revenue issued reassessments and determinations to taxpayers, who were remaining MLPs and PLPs. Taxpayers appealed on basis that Minister erred in interpreting settlement agreement. Tax Court judge dismissed appeal. Judge found that there was valid binding agreement between taxpayers and Minister. Judge concluded that reassessments and determinations proceeded in accordance with settlement agreement as it applied to taxpayers. Judge concluded that phrase “on the basis consistent with” meant that same ratio of disallowed expenses that applied to SH MLP would also apply to taxpayers. Judge found that ratio to be applied for producer referral and financing fees was to be determined by dividing amount disallowed for SH MLP by total amount of incurred for those specific fees. Taxpayers appealed. Appeal dismissed. Judge did not err in finding that settlement agreement was applicable to taxpayers, as representative who signed settlement agreement had capacity to conclude agreement on behalf of taxpayers. There were no grounds warranting intervention regarding judge’s interpretation of phrase “on the basis consistent with”. Judge did not err in determining ratio or in finding there was meeting of minds. There was no reason to interfere with judge’s conclusion that terms of settlement agreement were sufficiently certain. Judge did not err in finding that agreement was enforceable because it reflected principled application of Income Tax Act to known facts.

University Hill Holdings Inc. (Formerly 589918 B.C. Ltd.) v. Canada (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 6704, 2017 FCA 232, J.D. Denis Pelletier J.A., Richard Boivin J.A., and Mary J.L. Gleason J.A. (F.C.A.).

Free newsletter

Our newsletter is FREE and keeps you up to date on all the developments in the Ontario legal community. Please enter your email address below to subscribe.

Recent articles & video

Relocation disputes surge in family law litigation, says Lerners LLP’s Ryan McNeil

Ont. CA confirms future harm risk not compensable in contaminated medication class action

Law Commission of Ontario announces new board of governors appointments

Ontario Superior Court upholds ‘fair dealing’ in franchise dispute

Ontario Superior Court orders retrial for catastrophic impairment case due to procedural unfairness

LEAF celebrates 39 years fighting gender-based discrimination at annual Evening for Equality gala

Most Read Articles

Ontario Superior Court confirms License Appeal Tribunal cannot award punitive damages

Ontario Court of Appeal denies builder's request for a trial on damages in a real estate dispute

Ontario Superior Court grants extension for service of expert reports in medical negligence case

Ontario Superior Court denies late motion to transfer car accident case to simplified procedure