The appellant was appealing an assessment made by Revenue Quebec on behalf of the (federal) Minister under s. 270(4) of the Excise Tax Act in respect of a debt of a corporation of which she had been a receiver. Angers J noted (at para. 4) that (TaxInterpretations translation):
The issues before me are essentially the same as those put before Justice Lareau of the Court of Quebec and on which he has already pronounced. Only the legislative provisions on which the assessments rest are different ... .
There was an agreed statement of facts based on the findings of Lareau J.
After finding that it would constitute an abuse of process to consider the issues in the present appeal given their similarity to those disposed of by Lareau J., Anger J noted that the objective instead was for judicial comity and that "judgments on the same question be coherent" (para. 16).
In the Federal Court of Appeal (also dealing with an appeal on an ETA s. 325 issue), Blais CJ stated (at (para. 7) that "the decision of Justice Angers applying the principles of judicial comity [courtoisie judiciaire] was quite justified in the particular circumstances" and further noted the the Court of Quebec decision had since been affirmed in the Quebec Court of Appeal.
Houda International Inc. v. The Queen,  GSTC 8, 2010 TCC 622
Houda was granted an extension from the Court of Quebec in its QST appeal on the basis that it was not at fault for its lawyer’s failure to timely file an appeal. Its parallel application in the Tax Court of Canada from a GST assessment, was granted on the basis that the two statutory extension tests were essentially the same, and the doctrine of “abuse of process” prevented relitigation of an issue already decided in another court. Boyle J further found (at para. 22) that “judicial comity” would be further grounds to avoid duplicating the litigation and avoid potential conflicting decisions:
According to the doctrine of judicial comity, reasoned judgments of such courts or judges should be deferred to in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
|Locations of other summaries||Wordcount|
|Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 305 - Subsection 305(5)||relitigation of same appeal extension ruled on in Quebec would be abuse of process and contrary to judicial comity||221|
|Tax Topics - General Concepts - Abuse of Process||relitigation of same appeal extension ruled on in Quebec would be abuse of process||135|