Beaubier
J.T.C.C.:
—
These
appeals
were
heard
jointly
on
common
evidence
at
Calgary,
Alberta
on
August
8,
1996
pursuant
to
the
General
Procedure.
Both
Appellants
testified
and
called
their
chartered
accountant,
Larry
Shelley.
The
Respondent
called
Patricia
McCulloch,
an
employee
of
Revenue
Canada.
The
Appellants
were
assessed
on
the
basis
that
they
received
taxable
dividends
in
1990
in
the
following
amounts:
Edward
N.
Horkoff:
$81,992.70
Marion
Horkoff:
$78,777.30
They
appealed
and
alleged
that
they
received
the
dividends
in
1991,
the
year
in
which
they
reported
the
dividends.
The
dividends
were
paid
to
them
by
Horkoff
Surveys
Ltd.
(“HSL”).
The
Appellants’
shares
in
HSL
were
sold
to
DataSpan
Technology
Inc.
(“DSI”).
It
is
the
agreements
and
occurrences
respecting
this
sale
which
lie
at
the
root
of
the
dispute
between
the
parties.
The
chronology
is
as
follows:
1.
January
14,
1991
-
Horkoffs
and
DSI
signed
an
offer
by
DSI
to
purchase
Horkoffs’
shares
in
HSL.
Paragraphs
1,
2
and
3
of
the
offer
read:
January
11,
1991
MR.
and
MRS.
ED
HORKOFF
123
Mount
Victoria
Place
S.E.
Calgary,
Alberta
T2Z
1P1
Dear
Mr.
and
Mrs.
Horkoff:
Re:
OFFER
TO
PURCHASE
ALL
ISSUED
AND
OUTSTANDING
SHARES
OF
HORKOFF
SURVEYS
LTD.
(“HORKOFF’
OR
THE
“COMPANY”)
The
undersigned,
DataSpan
Technology
Inc.
(the
“Purchaser”)
hereby
offers
to
purchase
all
of
the
issued
and
outstanding
shares
in
the
capital
stock
of
the
Company
from
Ed
Horkoff
and
Marion
Horkoff
(collectively
referred
to
as
the
“Vendors”)
for
the
consideration
and
on
the
terms
and
conditions
following:
1.
The
Purchased
Shares
1.1
The
shares
which
are
subject
to
this
offer
are
100%
of
the
issued
and
outstanding
shares
in
the
capital
stock
of
the
Company
(the
“Purchased
Shares”)
to
be
purchased
as
follows:
(a)
effective
December
31,
1990,
the
Purchaser
shall
purchase
2,475
Class
“B”
shares
from
Ed
Horkoff,
25
Class
“B”
shares
from
Marion
Horkoff,
and
24
Class
“A”
shares
from
Marion
Horkoff;
and
(b)
effective
January
1,
1991,
the
Purchaser
shall
purchase
51
Class
“A”
shares
from
Ed
Horkoff
and
25
Class
“A”
shares
from
Marion
Horkoff.
2.
The
Purchase
Price
2.1
The
Purchaser,
subject
to
the
terms
and
conditions
of
this
Agreement,
agrees
to
purchase
and
the
Vendors
agree
to
sell
the
Purchased
Shares
for
the
sum
of
One
Million
Dollars
($1,000,000.00)
(the
“Purchase
Price”).
2.2
The
Purchase
Price
shall
be
satisfied
by
the
Purchaser
issuing
the
Vendors
4,000,000
common
shares
in
the
capital
stock
of
the
Purchaser
(the
“Common
Shares”)
duly
registered
in
the
names
of
the
Vendors
as
follows:
(a)
effective
December
31,
1990,
as
to
990,000
common
shares
to
Ed
Horkoff
and
730,000
common
shares
to
Marion
Horkoff;
and
(b)
effective
January
1,
1991,
as
to
1,530,000
common
shares
to
Ed
Horkoff
and
750,000
common
shares
to
Marion
Horkoff,
being
the
pro
rata
holdings
of
the
Vendors
in
the
Company.
2.3
At
the
Vendor’s
sole
election,
the
purchase
and
sale
evidenced
by
this
Agreement
shall
be
effected
in
such
a
manner
so
as
to
ensure
minimum
tax
liability
under
the
Income
Tax
Act
of
Canada
(the
“ITA”).
Should
the
Vendors
so
elect:
(a)
both
parties
shall
thereafter
execute
all
forms
and
documents
and
effect
all
filings
within
the
time
limits
prescribed
by
the
ITA
necessary
to
effect
a
tax-
deferred
sale
of
the
Purchased
Shares
pursuant
to
section
85
of
the
ITA
and
the
parties
hereby
elect
the
Purchase
Price
as
the
“proceeds
of
disposition”
and
“cost”
of
the
Purchased
Shares;
and
(b)
the
parties
acknowledge
that
they
consider
the
Purchase
Price
to
be
the
fair
market
value
of
the
Purchased
Shares
as
at
the
Closing
Date.
If
the
aggregate
of
the
fair
market
value
of
the
Purchased
Shares
should
be
determined,
whether:
(i)
by
a
tribunal
or
court
of
competent
jurisdiction,
(ii)
by
agreement
with
Revenue
Canada,
Taxation,
or
(iii)
otherwise
by
agreement
between
the
Vendor
and
the
Purchaser,
to
be
greater
or
less
than
the
Purchase
Price,
then
the
Purchase
Price
shall
be
adjusted
by
being
increased
or
decreased
so
as
to
equal
the
aggregate
of
the
fair
market
value
so
determined
and
the
Purchase
Price
payable
pursuant
to
paragraph
2.1
shall
be
adjusted
accordingly,
such
adjustments
to
be
effective
as
of
the
Closing
Date.
3.
Closing
Date
and
Effective
Date
3.1
The
completion
of
the
purchase
of
the
Purchased
Shares
pursuant
to
this
offer
shall
occur
on
January
18,
1991,
or
such
other
date
as
may
be
agreed
to
as
between
the
parties
(the
“Closing
Date”),
and
shall
take
place
at
the
offices
of
DataSpan
Technology
Inc.,
Suite
400
Aquitaine
Tower,
540
-
5th
Avenue
S.W.,
Calgary,
Alberta.
The
effective
date
of
the
purchase
and
sale
shall
be
11:59
p.m.
Calgary
time
on
December
31,
1990
in
respect
of
the
shares
set
out
in
paragraph
2.2(a)
above
and
1:00
p.m.
Calgary
time
on
January
1,
1991,
in
respect
of
the
shares
set
out
in
paragraph
2.2(b)
above.
Paragraph
4
contains
numerous
conditions
that
both
parties
had
to
comply
with
by
closing
date.
One,
that
the
Horkoffs
be
released
from
their
bank
guarantees
on
behalf
of
HSL,
was
not
met
and
was
waived
by
the
Horkoffs
at
the
closing.
Paragraph
5
makes
these
conditions
in
law
which
must
be
complied
with
by
each
party
at
or
prior
to
closing.
2.
February
13,
1991,
closing
occurred
and
all
resolutions
and
documents
were
signed,
including
the
resignation
of
Marion
Horkoff
as
a
director
of
HSL.
3.
January
16,
1991
is
the
date
on
the
share
certificates
of
DSI
that
the
Appellants
received
on
February
13,
1991
at
closing.
The
Notices
of
Appeal
state
that
the
Horkoffs
passed
a
resolution
dated
as
of
December
30,
1990
declaring
a
dividend
which
was
to
be
paid
no
later
than
May
1,
1991
to
the
holders
of
common
shares
of
record
at
the
close
of
business
on
December
30,
1990.
The
Reply
admits
that
the
Horkoffs
passed
a
resolution
dated
December
30,
1990
declaring
a
dividend.
The
answer
states
that
the
Appellants
did
not
receive
a
taxable
dividend
from
HSL
in
the
1990
taxation
year.
Rather
it
was
received
in
the
1991
taxation
year.
On
the
evidence
before
the
Court,
the
dividends
were
declared
on
February
13,
1991
to
be
paid
to
the
holders
of
common
shares
of
record
“on
the
date
of
this
resolution”,
(see
Exhibit
A-l,
Tab
18).
The
actual
amount
of
the
dividend
was
not
known
until
the
morning
of
February
13,
1991.
Thus,
on
the
evidence
before
the
Court:
1.
The
offer
dated
January
13,
1991
had
specific
conditions
which
had
to
by
complied
with
before
closing.
The
condition
that
the
Horkoffs’
guarantees
must
be
released
was
not
only
a
very
important
condition
of
the
transaction,
it
is
a
vital
condition
in
any
such
contract.
2.
No
dividend
was
declared
until
February
13,
1991.
3.
No
dividend
was
paid
or
transferred
to
the
Appellants
until
after
the
amount
of
the
dividend
was
known
and
the
resolution
was
passed
on
February
13,
1991.
4.
HSL
would
not
have
declared
or
paid
any
such
dividend,
had
the
sale
of
its
shares
to
DSI
not
proceeded
on
February
13,
1991.
In
this
case
the
Respondent
proposes
to
backdate
the
dividend
and
the
receipt
of
the
dividend
to
the
date
fixed
in
the
dividend
declaration.
However
the
assessments
of
the
Horkoffs
must
be
based
upon
the
date
they
received
the
dividend.
Receipt
did
not
occur
and
could
not
have
occurred
in
1990.
It
occurred
in
1991.
On
the
evidence
before
the
Court
the
dividend
was
actually
paid
to
the
Appellants
by
a
transfer
of
assets,
funds,
and
a
loan
in
1991.
The
appeals
are
allowed.
These
matters
are
referred
to
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
for
reconsideration
and
reassessment
pursuant
to
these
reasons.
The
Appellants
are
awarded
their
party
and
party
costs.
Appeal
allowed.