Tax - Income Tax - Administration and Enforcement
Taxpayer’s case was one of many similar appeals on issues including deduction of losses arising from foreign currency trading transactions and deduction of bad debts. Appeals were subject to case management and case management judge found that, in light of complexity and intricacy of appeals, lead cases rule under s. 146.1(2) of Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) was not appropriate. Case management judge issued interim order providing that certain appeals would be heard together or one immediately after other by same judge. Taxpayer appealed. Appeal dismissed. Tax Court judge, in capacity of case management judge, did not make palpable and overriding error in preferring to advance appeals to trial by way of R. 26 of Rules rather than by way of R. 146.1 of Rules. Even if Tax Court judge erred in interpreting R. 146.1 of Rules, he did not err in exercise of discretion. Since choosing R. 26 of Rules rather than R. 146 of Rules was option open to Tax Court judge under Rules, his choice was not one which justified appellate intervention. Such conclusion should not be taken as endorsement of Tax Court Judge’s understanding of R. 146.1 of Rules and of whether Crown needed to consent to being bound by result of lead case(s).
4092325 Investments Ltd. v. Canada (2019), 2019 CarswellNat 4390, 2019 FCA 225, Marc Nadon J.A., Gleason J.A., and Rivoalen J.A. (F.C.A.); affirmed (2018), 2018 CarswellNat 6762, 2018 TCC 228, Guy R. Smith J. (T.C.C. [General Procedure]).
Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca