Benoît v. Guérin

Benoît v. Guérin

The seizure was valid and must stand because the certificate and assessments supported the tax debt which was not prescribed in light of the assessment dates and controlling law/amendment; the vehicle was a simulated transfer and third parties may rely on the apparent contract so ownership was attributed to the debtor; the objector Guérin failed to demonstrate ownership of the furniture (insufficient evidence, financing in debtor's name), and therefore both objections are dismissed.

Citation
2004 FC 1014
Parties
Judgment Creditor: Minister of National Revenue / Canada Revenue Agency; Judgment Debtor: Pierre Benoît; Objector: Chantale Guérin; Objector: Maxime Dubois
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Collection Proceedings Under the Income Tax Act; Objection to Seizure in Execution / Hearing on Objections Under Article 597 C.c.p.; Reasons for Order
Outcome
Objections dismissed; seizure upheld.
Legal Topics
Seizure in Execution, Limitation/prescription for Tax Collection, Ownership Dispute, Simulation/counter‑letter, Income Tax Act Collection Certificates
Source Language
English
Tax Law Civil Procedure Property Law Quebec Civil Law Seizure in Execution Limitation/prescription for Tax Collection Ownership Dispute Simulation/counter‑letter +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Minister of National Revenue / Canada Revenue Agency

Judgment Creditor

Pierre Benoît

Judgment Debtor

Chantale Guérin

Objector

Maxime Dubois

Objector

Procedural Posture

Collection Proceedings Under the Income Tax Act; Objection to Seizure in Execution / Hearing on Objections Under Article 597 C.c.p.; Reasons for Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the certificate supporting the seizure was defective or vague
  2. 2 Whether the tax debt was statute‑barred (prescribed)
  3. 3 Whether the seized vehicle was owned by the objector or was a simulated transfer

Ratio Decidendi

The seizure was valid and must stand because the certificate and assessments supported the tax debt which was not prescribed in light of the assessment dates and controlling law/amendment; the vehicle was a simulated transfer and third parties may rely on the apparent contract so ownership was attributed to the debtor; the objector Guérin failed to demonstrate ownership of the furniture (insufficient evidence, financing in debtor's name), and therefore both objections are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Objections dismissed; seizure upheld.

Orders

  • The objection of Maxime Dubois is dismissed.
  • The objection of Chantale Guérin is dismissed.