 Printer-Friendly Page
Date: 20000830 Docket: A-360-99 OTTAWA, ONTARIO, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 30, 2000 CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LÉTOURNEAU J.A. NOËL J.A. BETWEEN: GINETTE RACINE Plaintiff AND: THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Defendant. JUDGMENT The application for judicial review is dismissed without costs. J. Richard C.J. Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a. Date: 20000830 Docket: A-586-99 OTTAWA, ONTARIO, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 30, 2000 CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LÉTOURNEAU J.A. NOËL J.A.
BETWEEN: ROBERT SOULIÈRE Plaintiff AND: THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Defendant JUDGMENT The application for judicial review is dismissed without costs. J. Richard C.J. Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a. Date: 20000830 CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LÉTOURNEAU J.A. NOËL J.A.
A-360-99 BETWEEN: GINETTE RACINE Plaintiff AND: THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Defendant _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-586-99 BETWEEN: ROBERT SOULIÈRE Plaintiff AND: THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Defendant Hearing held at Ottawa, Ontario on Wednesday, August 30, 2000 Judgment from the bench at Ottawa, Ontario on Wednesday, August 30, 2000 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A. Date: 20000830 CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE LÉTOURNEAU J.A. NOËL J.A.
A-360-99 BETWEEN: GINETTE RACINE Plaintiff AND: THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Defendant _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-586-99 BETWEEN: ROBERT SOULIÈRE Plaintiff AND: THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Defendant REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the bench at Ottawa, Ontario on Wednesday, August 30, 2000) LÉTOURNEAU J.A. [1] The plaintiffs are challenging a decision by the Minister of National Revenue ("the Minister") which held that for the period in question, from December 1, 1996 to December 31, 1997, the employment held by them was insurable employment. [2] Judge Lamarre of the Tax Court of Canada was aware, as she said at p. 3 of her decision, that this was [TRANSLATION] "a borderline case with as many features of a contract of service as of a contract for services". She sought to weigh the facts in evidence and apply the tests for differentiating between the two types of contract. In the end, she concluded that the Minister's determination was correct. [3] Counsel for the plaintiffs did not persuade the Court that the judge erred in her analytical work and the conclusion to which she came. [4] Counsel for the plaintiffs also strongly objected to the fact that Judge Lamarre relied on the assumptions of fact made by the Minister as a basis for his determination and accorded them prima facie evidentiary value. The Court is satisfied that by proceeding in this way the judge was only following the procedure applicable in such cases. [5] For these reasons, the applications for judicial review in appeals A-360-99 and A-586-99 will be dismissed without costs. Gilles Létourneau J.A. Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a. FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD COURT No.: A-586-99 STYLE OF CAUSE: ROBERT SOULIÈRE v. MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE PLACE OF HEARING: OTTAWA, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: AUGUST 30, 2000 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND LÉTOURNEAU AND NOËL JJ.A.) DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A. APPEARANCES: JEAN-PIERRE R. LALONDE FOR THE PLAINTIFF ANNE-MARIE LÉVESQUE FOR THE DEFENDANT CATHY CHALIFOUR SOLICITORS OF RECORD: JEAN-PIERRE R. LALONDE FOR THE PLAINTIFF GATINEAU, QUEBEC MORRIS ROSENBERG FOR THE DEFENDANT DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA OTTAWA, ONTARIO |
|||
|
|||
|
|
