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
The Tax Court dismissed Michelle Qureshi’s income tax and GST appeals, finding she bought the condominium for speculative resale rather than as a residence.
The court dismissed judicial review of a Vancouver vacancy tax decision, holding the supplementary notice was not statute-barred and the principal residence finding was reasonable.
Applicant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that Ms. Nugent ceased to use 612 Villa Drive as her principal residence or that she failed to maintain it; circumstantial observations and raw water‑usage calculations were insufficient, and improperly framed affidavit material did not displace Ms. Nugent's credible sworn evidence that she lived at and maintained the property consistent with the will, so the application to terminate the life interest was dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Court dismissed the appeal because the trial judge reasonably applied the best‑interests standard, properly weighed evidence and credibility, correctly concluded primary residence should remain with the respondent to preserve the child's stability, and legitimately conferred final decision‑making authority to the respondent in the event of disagreement; there was no reasonable apprehension of bias.
Source excerpt
On the balance of probabilities the Court accepted the appellant's credible testimony and supporting indicia (sale of prior home, appliance purchases delivered to the Asbestos address, local bank account, and part‑time permanent occupation beginning June 2015) and found the Asbestos property was intended and did serve as the appellant's habitual residence; accordingly the appeal was allowed and the assessment set aside and remitted for reassessment to grant the new housing rebate of $1157.67.
Source excerpt
The court granted joint custody, kept the children’s principal residence with the mother, set a revised access schedule, and ordered child support, nominal spousal support, and debt allocation.
Applying the case law criteria, the Tribunal concluded the appellant was an independent builder who repeatedly bought lots, built houses, lived in them briefly and sold them in the same locality, financed transactions on high‑risk terms and operated through construction entities; these facts establish at least a secondary intention to sell for profit and characterize the gain as business income, so the reassessment was confirmed.
Source excerpt
Expenses related to the lower unit were either personal (incurred with the intention to occupy) or capital (substantially transformed the unit) and therefore not deductible; for the upper unit the majority of expenditures were repairs incurred to earn rental income but 80% of the electrical work was capital, resulting in an allowable current expense deduction of $15,363.46 for 2005; appeal allowed in part and reassessment referred back to the Minister to give effect to that amount.
Source excerpt
Applying the Happy Valley Farms factors to the evidence, the short ownership period, pattern of frequent similar transactions, promotion and listing of the property, and timing of improvements showed the appellant purchased the condo with a view to immediate resale; therefore the profit constituted business income and the appellant failed to rebut the Minister's reassessment.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld forfeiture of a home used for a sophisticated marihuana grow-operation, finding the children’s principal-residence claim was not proved and full forfeiture was proportionate.
Explore more
