In One York Street Inc. v 2360083 Ontario Limited, 2026 ONCA 176, the Court held that, by putting in issue its state of mind on signing a lease where the state of mind was based in part on legal advice,…
GLGI appeals struck
In a previous post, I discussed Kelly v R, 2026 TCC 53, in which Mr Justice Graham proposed to dismiss ongoing GLGI appeals as an abuse of process. Eight of the appellants to whom this proposal applied provided submissions for…
What is a settlement agreement?
The parties in a Tax Court appeal exchanged emails about settlement. The taxpayers’ counsel, via email, accepted an emailed counter-offer from the Crown. The Crown then sent minutes of settlement that contained terms not in the taxpayers’ original offer as…
Mistakes in judgments
What happens if the parties to a consent to judgment make a mistake in it? The Court in Oram’s Enterprises Limited v R, 2025 TCC 182, found that the functus officio doctrine and the importance of the finality of judgments…
GLGI appeals to be struck?
In Kelly v R, 2026 TCC 53, Justice Graham has given multiple taxpayers until April 24, 2026, to provide written submissions on why their appeals should not be struck without a hearing “for abusing this Court’s process”. The taxpayers were…
Privilege
Coopers Park Real Estate Development Corporation v. R, 2024 TCC 122, considered the scope of solicitor-client privilege where an accounting firm had been engaged to act as the client’s agent to obtain legal advice. Providing advice to the lawyer, however,…
Appeal quashed
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.