Qu'appelle Indian Residential School Council v. Canada (Department of Revenue)
The Minister did not breach any fiduciary obligation to the individual appellants, had statutory authority under subsection 153(1.1) of the Income Tax Act to enter into the source deduction agreement, and there was no basis to disturb the trial judge's discretionary costs award; appeal dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2002 FCA 439
- Parties
- Appellant: Qu'Appelle Indian Residential School Council; Appellant: Spencer Musqua; Appellant: Doris Bellegarde; Appellant: Peter Badger; Appellant: Anita McLeod; Appellant: Irene Poitras; Appellant: Leila Thomson; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Revenue
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 7 November 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Decision on Appeal (federal Court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Income Tax, Source Deductions, Fiduciary Duty, Statutory Authority, Costs
- 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
Qu'Appelle Indian Residential School Council
Appellant
Spencer Musqua
Appellant
Doris Bellegarde
Appellant
Peter Badger
Appellant
Anita McLeod
Appellant
Irene Poitras
Appellant
Leila Thomson
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Revenue
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision on Appeal (federal Court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Minister breached a fiduciary obligation to the individual appellants
- 2 Whether the Minister had an obligation to instruct appellants about filing income tax returns and notices of objection
- 3 Whether the Minister had statutory authority to enter into the agreement relating to source deductions under the Income Tax Act
Ratio Decidendi
The Minister did not breach any fiduciary obligation to the individual appellants, had statutory authority under subsection 153(1.1) of the Income Tax Act to enter into the source deduction agreement, and there was no basis to disturb the trial judge's discretionary costs award; appeal dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- No costs awarded at this level
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Qu'appelle Indian Residential School Council v. Canada (Department of Revenue) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-11-07 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 439 File numbers A-733-01 Decision Content Date: 20021107 Docket: A-733-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 439 CORAM: NOËL, J.A. SHARLOW, J.A. MALONE, J.A. BETWEEN: QU'APPELLE INDIAN RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL COUNCIL, SPENCER MUSQUA, DORIS BELLEGARDE, PETER BADGER, ANITA MCLEOD, IRENE POITRAS and LEILA THOMSON Appellants and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Respondent Heard at Calgary, Alberta, on November 7, 2002. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Calgary, Alberta, on November 7, 2002. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL, J.A. Date: 20021107 Docket: A-733-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 439 CORAM: NOËL, J.A. SHARLOW, J.A. MALONE, J.A. BETWEEN: QU'APPELLE INDIAN RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL COUNCIL SPENCER MUSQUA, DORIS BELLEGARDE, PETER BADGER, ANITA MCLEOD, IRENE POITRAS and LEILA THOMSON Appellants and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Calgary, Alberta on November 7, 2002 NOËL, J.A. [1] We have not been persuaded that the Minister breached any fiduciary obligation to the individual appellants or that the Minister had an obligation to instruct the individual appellants as to the filing of income tax returns and notices of objection. [2] Contrary to the submissions of counsel for the appellants, the Minister did have the statutory authority to enter into the agreement relating to source deductions by virtue of subsection 153(1.1) of the Income Tax Act, which has been in force since 1973. [3] The appellants have also appealed the Trial Judge's award of costs. The matter of costs is discretionary, and there is no basis for our intervention on that issue. [4] For these reasons the appeal must be dismissed, in the circumstances without costs at this level. "M. NOËL" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-733-01 STYLE OF CAUSE: QU'APPELLE INDIAN RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL COUNCIL ET AL v. THE QUEEN PLACE OF HEARING: Calgary, Alberta DATE OF HEARING: November 7, 2002 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Delivered from the Bench: NOËL, J.A. DATED: November 7, 2002 APPEARANCES: Mr. Dwayne M. Anderson FOR THE APPELLANT Regina, SK Mr. Mark Kindrachuk FOR THE RESPONDENT Saskatoon, SK SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Anderson Law Firm FOR THE APPELLANT Professional Corporation Mr. Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada