Simard c. La Reine

Simard c. La Reine

On the evidence appellants were either limited or passive partners; the partnerships did not carry on bona fide SR&ED businesses or incur substantiated SR&ED expenses; appellants failed to rebut the Minister's assessments; limitation waivers were valid and no actionable s.241 disclosure to bar reliance occurred;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2007 TCC 540
Parties
Appellant: Nicole St‑Laurent; Appellant: Guy Delisle; Appellant: Robert Dufour; Appellant: Jean Simard; Appellant: Gilles Kelly; Appellant: Denis Guillemette; Appellant: Denis Duplain; Appellant: Yvan Bilodeau; Appellant: Daniel St‑Pierre; Appellant: Denis Villeneuve; Appellant: Steve Sutherland; Appellant: Yves Tourville; Appellant: Lucie Poirier; Appellant: Alain Aubé; Appellant: Clément Lapointe; Appellant: Gilles Fleury; Appellant: Chantal Simard; Appellant: Jean‑Pierre Anctil; Appellant: Louis Vézina; Appellant: Louis‑Marie Ross; Appellant: Gérald Robitaille; Appellant: Michel Pichette; Appellant: Guy Langlois; Appellant: Marie‑Marthe Brochu; Appellant: Yvon Paré; Appellant: Remy Lessard; Appellant: Jean‑Claude Thivierge; Appellant: François Lapointe; Appellant: Jules‑Fabien Simard; Appellant: Guy Drolet; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
Court
Tax Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Income Tax Act Appeal / Judgment — Dismissal
Outcome
Appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Investment Tax Credit, Business Loss Deduction, Sr&ed, Tax Shelter, Specified Member, Limitation Period Waiver, Disclosure of Taxpayer Information (s.241), Charter S.11(b), Procedural Delay, Jurisdictional Limits
Source Language
en
Tax Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Securities Regulation Partnership Law Privacy Law Investment Tax Credit Business Loss Deduction +8 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicole St‑Laurent

Appellant

Guy Delisle

Appellant

Robert Dufour

Appellant

Jean Simard

Appellant

Gilles Kelly

Appellant

Denis Guillemette

Appellant

Denis Duplain

Appellant

Yvan Bilodeau

Appellant

Daniel St‑Pierre

Appellant

Denis Villeneuve

Appellant

Steve Sutherland

Appellant

Yves Tourville

Appellant

Lucie Poirier

Appellant

Alain Aubé

Appellant

Clément Lapointe

Appellant

Gilles Fleury

Appellant

Chantal Simard

Appellant

Jean‑Pierre Anctil

Appellant

Louis Vézina

Appellant

Louis‑Marie Ross

Appellant

Gérald Robitaille

Appellant

Michel Pichette

Appellant

Guy Langlois

Appellant

Marie‑Marthe Brochu

Appellant

Yvon Paré

Appellant

Remy Lessard

Appellant

Jean‑Claude Thivierge

Appellant

François Lapointe

Appellant

Jules‑Fabien Simard

Appellant

Guy Drolet

Appellant

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Income Tax Act Appeal / Judgment — Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were members of genuine partnerships and whether those partnerships carried on businesses eligible for SR&ED ITCs and business loss deductions
  2. 2 Whether appellants were "specified members" under s.248(1) of the Income Tax Act and thus ineligible for claimed tax benefits
  3. 3 Whether the Minister/CRA acted unlawfully or in breach of procedural or Charter rights such that assessments should be vacated

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence appellants were either limited or passive partners; the partnerships did not carry on bona fide SR&ED businesses or incur substantiated SR&ED expenses; appellants failed to rebut the Minister's assessments; limitation waivers were valid and no actionable s.241 disclosure to bar reliance occurred; administrative delays and complaints do not permit vacating lawful assessments under the Tax Court's jurisdiction; accordingly the appeals were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed in accordance with Reasons for Judgment.
  • Fees for preparation for the hearing, the hearing and the taxation of costs limited to those applicable to a single appeal.