Canada v. Gauthier

Canada v. Gauthier

On the balance of probabilities the court found the seizing creditor's evidence and presumptions more convincing and that the opposing party failed to prove he was the true owner; contradictions in affidavits and exhibits, residence facts, timing of renovations and financing, and late procedural arguments...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2006 FC 639
Parties
Judgment Creditor: Canada; Judgment Debtor: Guy Gauthier; Opposing Party: Marcel Gauthier
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Income Tax Seizure Opposition Under Income Tax Act / Opposition Under Article 597 C.c.p.; Motion Hearing and Reasons for Order
Outcome
Opposition dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Opposition to Seizure, Simulation / Prête Nom, Evidence Presumptions, Improbation, Ownership Dispute
Source Language
english
Tax Law Civil Procedure Property Law Quebec Civil Law Opposition to Seizure Simulation / Prête Nom Evidence Presumptions Improbation +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Canada

Judgment Creditor

Guy Gauthier

Judgment Debtor

Marcel Gauthier

Opposing Party

Procedural Posture

Income Tax Seizure Opposition Under Income Tax Act / Opposition Under Article 597 C.c.p.; Motion Hearing and Reasons for Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Marcel Gauthier is the true owner of 55 Noble Street or a prête-nom for Guy Gauthier
  2. 2 Whether there was simulation/counter-letter under C.C.Q. art.1451
  3. 3 Whether third-party proof by presumptions is permissible and sufficient

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the court found the seizing creditor's evidence and presumptions more convincing and that the opposing party failed to prove he was the true owner; contradictions in affidavits and exhibits, residence facts, timing of renovations and financing, and late procedural arguments (improbation and deceased witness) defeated the opposition; therefore the opposition was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Opposition dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Dismissal of the opposition under article 597 C.C.P. with costs
  • Order issued accordingly dated May 24, 2006