AAR Mortgage Corporation v. The Queen

AAR Mortgage Corporation v. The Queen

Given conflicting Tax Court authorities on whether a corporation may be represented by a non-lawyer in a general procedure appeal and the pendency of the Federal Court of Appeal decision in The Queen v. BCS Group Services Inc., the Court exercised its discretion to hold the motion in abeyance until the Federal Court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2019 TCC 154
Parties
Appellant: AAR MORTGAGE CORPORATION; Respondent: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Court
Tax Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Tax Court General Procedure Appeal / Motion to Permit Non Lawyer Corporate Representative (pre Trial Motion); Held in Abeyance
Outcome
Motion held in abeyance until the Federal Court of Appeal has rendered its decision in The Queen v. BCS Group Services Inc.
Legal Topics
Corporate Representation in Court, Non Lawyer Representation, Tax Court of Canada Act S.17.1, Tax Court of Canada Rules R.30, Abeyance Pending Appellate Decision
Source Language
en
Tax Law Procedural Law Administrative Law Corporate Representation in Court Non Lawyer Representation Tax Court of Canada Act S.17.1 Tax Court of Canada Rules R.30 Abeyance Pending Appellate Decision

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AAR MORTGAGE CORPORATION

Appellant

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tax Court General Procedure Appeal / Motion to Permit Non Lawyer Corporate Representative (pre Trial Motion); Held in Abeyance

  1. 1 Whether a corporation may be represented by a non-lawyer in a Tax Court general procedure appeal
  2. 2 Whether leave of the Court is required to permit non-lawyer representation of a corporation
  3. 3 Whether the motion should be decided or held in abeyance pending the Federal Court of Appeal decision in The Queen v. BCS Group Services Inc.

Ratio Decidendi

Given conflicting Tax Court authorities on whether a corporation may be represented by a non-lawyer in a general procedure appeal and the pendency of the Federal Court of Appeal decision in The Queen v. BCS Group Services Inc., the Court exercised its discretion to hold the motion in abeyance until the Federal Court of Appeal renders its decision; the appellant provided no supporting evidence of inability to retain counsel despite asserting financial losses.

Court Disposition

Motion held in abeyance until the Federal Court of Appeal has rendered its decision in The Queen v. BCS Group Services Inc.

Orders

  • The application is held in abeyance until the Federal Court of Appeal has rendered its decision in The Queen v. BCS Group Services Inc.