Lipkowski v. Canada (National Revenue)
The appeal is dismissed because the Federal Court judge was properly satisfied that the statutory elements for the production requirement under s.231.2 were met, did not misapply or misinterpret solicitor-client privilege with respect to lawyers' records, and did not prevent the appellant from presenting his case or...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2014 FCA 171
- Parties
- Appellant: Julian W. Lipkowski; Respondent: The Minister of National Revenue
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 26 June 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal From Federal Court Order Under the Income Tax Act / Federal Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From Federal Court (order Issued July 30, 2013)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent in this Court
- Legal Topics
- S.231.2 Income Tax Act, Solicitor Client Privilege, Compulsory Information Disclosure, Treatment of Self Represented Litigants
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Julian W. Lipkowski
Appellant
The Minister of National Revenue
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Federal Court Order Under the Income Tax Act / Federal Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From Federal Court (order Issued July 30, 2013)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the requisite elements for a s.231.2 production requirement under the Income Tax Act were established
- 2 Whether solicitor-client privilege protected the records at issue (lawyers' records)
- 3 Whether the Federal Court judge misapprehended the appellant's case or prevented him from presenting his full case
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is dismissed because the Federal Court judge was properly satisfied that the statutory elements for the production requirement under s.231.2 were met, did not misapply or misinterpret solicitor-client privilege with respect to lawyers' records, and did not prevent the appellant from presenting his case or discriminate against him as a self-represented litigant; no error justified appellate intervention.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent in this Court
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent in this Court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Lipkowski v. Canada (National Revenue) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2014-06-26 Neutral citation 2014 FCA 171 File numbers A-284-13 Decision Content Date: 20140626 Docket: A-284-13 Citation: 2014 FCA 171 CORAM: SHARLOW J.A. DAWSON J.A. STRATAS J.A. BETWEEN: JULIAN W. LIPKOWSKI Appellant and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on June 26, 2014. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on June 26, 2014. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: DAWSON J.A. Date: 20140626 Docket: A-284-13 Citation: 2014 FCA 171 CORAM: SHARLOW J.A. DAWSON J.A. STRATAS J.A. BETWEEN: JULIAN W. LIPKOWSKI Appellant and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on June 26, 2014). DAWSON J.A. [1] This is an appeal from an order of the Federal Court issued in Court File T-575-12 on July 30, 2013. The order compelled the appellant to comply with a requirement to provide information and documents to the Canada Revenue Agency. The requirement issued under the authority of paragraphs 231.2(1)(a) and (b) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c.1 (5th Supp) (Act). [2] While the appellant asserts numerous errors on the part of the Judge who issued the order, the appellant has not established any error that warrants our intervention. More particularly, based upon the content of the Judge’s order, the record before her and the transcript of the hearing in the Federal Court we are satisfied that: i) the Judge was properly satisfied that the requisite elements of the Act were made out; ii) the Judge did not misapprehend the appellant’s case with respect to the interpretation and application of the relevant provision of the Act or the principles of solicitor-client privilege as they relate to lawyers’ records; and iii) the Judge neither prevented the appellant from presenting his full case nor discriminated against him as a self-represented litigant. [3] For these reasons, the appeal will be dismissed with costs in this Court. "Eleanor R. Dawson" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD Docket: A-284-13 STYLE OF CAUSE: JULIAN W. LIPKOWSKI v. THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: June 26, 2014 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A. DAWSON J.A. STRATAS J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: DAWSON J.A. APPEARANCES: Julian W. Lipkowski For The Appellant (self-represented) Margaret Nott Samantha Hurst For The Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD: N/A For The Appellant (self-represented) William F. Pentney Deputy Attorney General of Canada For The Respondent