Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Appeal dismissed after the Court upheld a status-review dismissal for delay, found no jurisdictional error by the associate judge, and awarded costs of $900.
On the evidence, the appellant failed to rebut the Minister's pleaded assumptions and did not prove on a balance of probabilities that the work met the Northwest Hydraulic criteria: no objective proof of technological uncertainty (no expert evidence), no specific testable hypotheses tied to each experiment, testing was trial and error rather than a systematic scientific method, no demonstrated technological advance, and inadequate contemporaneous records. Therefore the claimed SR&ED expenditures are not allowable and the appeals are dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Court exercised its case management discretion to order specific compulsion outcomes as set out in the attached unpublished appendices, granted leave to the Respondent to amend the Replies subject to directions and a 60‑day timetable for Appellants' consent, directed parties to provide ordered answers within the time allotted, and reserved costs to the trial judge given mixed results of contemporaneous motions.
Source excerpt
The Court granted mixed relief: it compelled the Appellants to provide specified further particulars (including a numbered list of each Purchase and Redemption transaction linked to closing‑book documents, Bob's non‑privileged correspondence and certain phone records) and compelled the Respondent to produce appropriately redacted CRA/PCC/GAAR and related documents and analyses; it allowed the Respondent to seek to amend replies withdrawing assumptions about Felesky Flynn only if the amendment is clarified and particularized; privilege claims must be expressly asserted and redacted minimally;…
Source excerpt
The Tax Court held that deemed dividends and unpaid promissory notes did not amount to a transfer of property under s. 160, so AAM’s appeal was allowed.
The Court found the appellant did not prove on a balance of probabilities that he validly resigned effective October 31, 1999 or that any Form 1 removing him was filed prior to the relevant period; the Form 1 in counsel's file and registry entries were insufficient in the face of credibility concerns and lack of objective evidence that the corporation received a written resignation, therefore the appellant remained a director within the relevant period and failed to establish the due diligence defence under s.227.1(3); appeal dismissed.
Source excerpt
The amendments were permitted because they add factual allegations in support of the existing basis that certain activities do not qualify as SR&ED under subsection 248(1); they do not constitute a new basis of assessment, cause no prejudice not compensable by costs, and therefore assist in resolving the real controversy; there was no need to determine the scope of s.152(9).
Source excerpt
Applying the Wiebe Door factors as summarized in 0808498 BC Ltd v MNR to the uncontroverted facts (hirer control, use of hirer’s equipment, training, payment by hour, no capital investment, no risk of loss, limited management responsibility and no opportunity for profit), the tribunal concluded the pastry chef was an employee for EI and CPP for 2018–2019; therefore the appeals are dismissed.
Source excerpt
Taxpayer’s books and records were unreliable but the Minister’s four alternative techniques were inadequately pleaded or founded and produced inflated results; the judge adopted a modified actual cash-to-non-cash ratio technique tailored to the taxpayer’s business (accounting for child trips and driver splits), reduced assessed business income for 2006–2008 accordingly, adjusted consequential GST reporting periods, and deleted gross negligence penalties for 2006 and 2007 while upholding them for 2008.
Source excerpt
Applying Rule 147 factors the Court found the Respondent entitled to enhanced partial indemnity costs: accepted Respondent's invoiced totals, rejected 80% substantial indemnity as inappropriate, awarded the Respondent 60% of solicitor-client costs for the RRSP Trust and Corporate Appeals plus fixed disbursements of $43,969, credited Appellants 20% of solicitor-client costs for the Grenon Appeals ($161,743), resulting in a net lump sum award of $1,197,942 payable by the Appellants jointly and severally because the appeals were intertwined and the appellants were related/controlled by the same…
Source excerpt
Explore more
