Wilson v. Canada (Revenue Canada)

Wilson v. Canada (Revenue Canada)

Motion dismissed because the newly produced letter and affidavit were discoverable prior to the November 25, 2004 decision by the exercise of due diligence (and in fact were sent to the plaintiff), the plaintiff and his counsel exhibited lack of diligence, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a mistake or that counsel was retained in time, and the documents would not have had a determining influence on the earlier decision; accordingly relief under Rules 397 and 399 is not available.

Citation
2005 FC 1340
Parties
Plaintiff: Grant R. Wilson; Defendants: Revenue Canada and Her Majesty the Queen
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil (tax Litigation) / Motion for Reconsideration of Order Dismissing Action (reconsideration Dismissed)
Outcome
Motion dismissed with costs to the defendants; earlier order upheld
Legal Topics
Reconsideration, Setting Aside Orders, Federal Courts Rules, Discovery, Costs
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Tax Law Civil Procedure Reconsideration Setting Aside Orders Federal Courts Rules Discovery Costs

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grant R. Wilson

Plaintiff

Revenue Canada and Her Majesty the Queen

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil (tax Litigation) / Motion for Reconsideration of Order Dismissing Action (reconsideration Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should set aside its November 25, 2004 order under Rule 397(1) or Rule 399(1)/(2)(a)
  2. 2 Whether newly produced documents (June 26, 2003 letter and affidavit) were discoverable with due diligence prior to the earlier decision
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff's failure to respond was due to mistake or accident and whether he had retained counsel

Ratio Decidendi

Motion dismissed because the newly produced letter and affidavit were discoverable prior to the November 25, 2004 decision by the exercise of due diligence (and in fact were sent to the plaintiff), the plaintiff and his counsel exhibited lack of diligence, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a mistake or that counsel was retained in time, and the documents would not have had a determining influence on the earlier decision; accordingly relief under Rules 397 and 399 is not available.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed with costs to the defendants; earlier order upheld

Orders

  • This motion is dismissed, with costs to the defendants.