Stein v. Stein

Stein v. Stein

The motion is allowed (except as to question 21) because the Federal Court has jurisdiction to consider simulation and forfeiture of term in this garnishment context and the questioned matters are relevant to credibility and to the garnisher's claim for forfeiture of term given the factual circumstances (loan amount, short term, absence of original note).

Citation
2003 FC 1284
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Molly Stein; Garnishee: Sandra Stein; Garnisher / Judgment Creditor: Her Majesty The Queen
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Tax Assessment Garnishment Under Income Tax Act / Motion to Dismiss Objections to Cross Examination on Affidavit
Outcome
Motion allowed with costs (except question 21). Deponent ordered to reappear at her expense to answer authorized questions. Order applied to related file with one set of costs.
Legal Topics
Garnishment, Cross Examination on Affidavit, Forfeiture of Term, Simulation, Jurisdiction, Credibility, Costs
Source Language
English
Tax Law Civil Procedure Garnishment Contract Law Cross Examination on Affidavit Forfeiture of Term Simulation Jurisdiction +2 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Molly Stein

Judgment Debtor

Sandra Stein

Garnishee

Her Majesty The Queen

Garnisher / Judgment Creditor

Procedural Posture

Tax Assessment Garnishment Under Income Tax Act / Motion to Dismiss Objections to Cross Examination on Affidavit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the garnisher was authorized to put the contested questions in cross-examination on affidavit
  2. 2 Whether the Federal Court has jurisdiction to consider civil law institutions (simulation, forfeiture of term) in this garnishment proceeding
  3. 3 Whether the contested questions were relevant to credibility and forfeiture of term and therefore permissible

Ratio Decidendi

The motion is allowed (except as to question 21) because the Federal Court has jurisdiction to consider simulation and forfeiture of term in this garnishment context and the questioned matters are relevant to credibility and to the garnisher's claim for forfeiture of term given the factual circumstances (loan amount, short term, absence of original note).

Court Disposition

Motion allowed with costs (except question 21). Deponent ordered to reappear at her expense to answer authorized questions. Order applied to related file with one set of costs.

Orders

  • Motion by Her Majesty The Queen allowed except as to question 21
  • Deponent Sandra Stein to reappear at her expense at a time and place agreed between the parties to answer the authorized questions and any legitimately resulting questions