Grenon v. Canada

Grenon v. Canada

The Federal Court of Appeal held the Tax Court judge properly exercised his discretion in refusing the stay and in refusing the appellant's proposed amendments and that the judge's language did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias; however the court found the Tax Court judge had mistakenly allowed amendments...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2007 FCA 239
Parties
Appellant: James T. Grenon; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal (federal Court of Appeal) / Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; cross-appeal allowed with costs; paragraphs 25.2 and 25.3 struck out.
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Amendment of Pleadings, Reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Striking Pleadings
Source Language
en
Tax Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Bias Stay of Proceedings Amendment of Pleadings Reasonable Apprehension of Bias Striking Pleadings

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James T. Grenon

Appellant

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal (federal Court of Appeal) / Appeal Decision

  1. 1 Whether the Tax Court judge erred in refusing to stay proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the Tax Court judge erred in refusing to allow amendments to the Notice of Appeal
  3. 3 Whether the judge's language gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias

Ratio Decidendi

The Federal Court of Appeal held the Tax Court judge properly exercised his discretion in refusing the stay and in refusing the appellant's proposed amendments and that the judge's language did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias; however the court found the Tax Court judge had mistakenly allowed amendments to paragraphs 25.2 and 25.3, struck those paragraphs out, dismissed the appeal with costs and allowed the Crown's cross-appeal with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; cross-appeal allowed with costs; paragraphs 25.2 and 25.3 struck out.

Orders

  • Dismiss the appeal with costs
  • Allow the Crown's cross-appeal with costs