Date: 20010604
Dockets: 2000-4255-EI,
2000-4256-CPP,
2000-4257-CPP,
2000-4258-EI
BETWEEN:
STAGES PERFORMING ARTS SCHOOL LTD.,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
AND
Dockets: 2000-4327-EI,
2000-4328-CPP
DONNA WILLIAMS,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
AND
Dockets: 2000-4572-EI,
2000-4573-CPP
KIRSTEN J. ODERMATT,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
AND
Dockets: 2000-4593-EI,
2000-4594-CPP
CHRISTIE D. HAMAR,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent.
Reasonsfor
Judgment
Rowe, D.J.T.C.C.
[1]
On September 27, 2000, the Minister of National Revenue (the
"Minister") sent a letter to Stages Performing Arts
School Ltd. (Stages) confirming an assessment for 1997 and 1998
relating to certain named workers as set forth in a schedule
attached to the said letter of decision. The decision, issued
pursuant to subsection 93(3) of the Employment Insurance
Act (the "Act"), was based on
paragraph 5(1)(a) of said Act. The letter included
a decision by the Minister to confirm assessments issued pursuant
to subsection 27.2(3) of the Canada Pension Plan (the
"Plan") based on paragraph 6(1)(a) of
said Plan pertaining to named individuals in the attached
schedule and both decisions were the subject of appeals -
2000-4258(EI) and 2000-4257(CPP). Evangelia (Lia Biros)
intervened in both appeals.
[2]
On September 14, 2000, the Minister issued a letter to Stages
deciding that the employment of Donna Ball-Watson was insurable
employment pursuant to the provisions of the Act because
she had been employed - by Stages - pursuant to a
contract of service for the period January 1, 1999 to January 7,
2000. In the same letter, the Minister decided to confirm the
employment of Donna Ball-Watson as being pensionable employment
pursuant to the Plan because she had been employed
pursuant to a contract of service during the relevant period.
Both decisions were the subject of appeals - 2000-4255(EI) - and
2000-4256(CPP).
[3]
On September 27, 2000, the Minister issued a letter to Donna
Williams confirming the portions of the assessments issued - to
Stages - pursuant to the Act and the Plan
pertaining to her, on the basis she had been employed under a
contract of service during 1997 and 1998 and was engaged in
insurable and pensionable service during those years. Williams
filed a separate appeal - 2000-4328(CPP) - arising
out of the decision issued pursuant to the Plan.
[4]
On September 27, 2000, the Minister issued a letter to Christie
D. Wilson - now known as Christie Hamar - confirming the
portions of the assessments issued - to Stages - pursuant to the
Act and the Plan pertaining to her, on the basis
she had been employed under a contract of service during 1997 and
1998 and was engaged in insurable and pensionable service during
those years. Hamar filed a separate appeal - 2000-4594(CPP)
- arising out of the decision issued pursuant to the
Plan.
[5]
On September 27, 2000, the Minister issued a letter to Kirsten J.
Odermatt confirming the portions of the assessments issued
- to Stages - pursuant to the Act and the
Plan pertaining to her, on the basis she had been employed
under a contract of service during 1997 and 1998 and was engaged
in insurable and pensionable service during those years. Odermatt
filed a separate appeal - 2000-4573(CPP) - from the
decision issued pursuant to the Plan.
[6]
The intervenor - Lia Biros - filed her own Notice of
Intervention but was not present in Court. Counsel for all
appellants and counsel for the respondent agreed all appeals
filed pursuant to the Act would be heard on common
evidence and the relevant result - in each instance - would
apply to the corresponding Canada Pension Plan appeal
filed by a particular appellant.
[7]
Kim Breiland testified she resides in Victoria, British Columbia
and is the President of Stages. She is a dance teacher and
performs the function of Artistic Director at the dance school
operated by the corporation. She started to study dance at age 7
and went on to take instruction at the National Ballet School.
She also trained in jazz dance in Victoria, Vancouver and Los
Angeles. As a performer, she was in various shows produced for
the entertainment of Canadian Armed Forces personnel stationed in
Egypt, Israel, Japan and Cyprus. In addition, she has performed
with several actors, dancers and entertainers, some of whom are
household names in North America. She has received various
nominations for awards within the arts community. In 1980, since
she had also studied gymnastics, she began operating a studio at
which she taught that discipline. In 1982, she incorporated
Stages and began to teach dance. Since that time, her students
have performed in many countries including while on tour -
in 1987 - in the former USSR and also during a visit to
Cuba. Others - such as Craig Hempsted - have followed
a professional career and perform on cruise ships and/or in
musical productions in Canada and the United States. Breiland
explained that the nature of the business requires dancers to
regard periods of inactivity - not as unemployment - but as a
hiatus between performing contracts. Her idea was to establish a
base of operations at which her colleagues could teach during
periods when they were not performing. Due to the physical
demands of teaching dance, Breiland stated the period of
instruction by an individual teacher must be limited to 1.5 hours
per day and to fewer days per week than five. This arrangement is
satisfactory to most instructors since most of them have other
jobs or sources of income. Turning to the names set forth in
Schedule A of the Reply to Notice of Appeal filed in appeal
2000-4258(EI), Breiland referred to Paul Becker and stated he was
a former student at Stages - now performing at various venues and
on cruise ships as well as working in the movie industry and
teaching dance in Thailand. Breiland identified a sheet -
Exhibit A-1 - as a document setting forth the amounts paid
to the workers at Stages during 1997 and 1998. According to the
relevant entry on said sheet, Becker earned the sum of $36.00 on
two occasions during 1997 for a total remuneration in the amount
of $72.00. In September, and again in November, 1997, he taught a
class for advanced students which - in each instance
- had been booked during periods when he returned to
Victoria for a brief visit. Evangelia (Lia) Biros began studying
at Stages when she was only 9. Later, she became a jazz/funk
dance teacher and instructed classes at Stages as well as at
other dance studios in Victoria and at certain public schools.
Biros also taught classes held at various community recreation
centres - such as Gordon Head - on Thursdays and Fridays through
an arrangement whereby Stages arranged with her to provide her
services to the community centre and then billed the Centre for
her instruction. Biros was a full-time student at the University
of Victoria during the relevant period. Tim Crofton is an actor
and director who has directed a musical for Stages. As a working
actor, he also taught classes at another school. In 1997, he
earned a total of $160.00 from Stages - as a result of providing
services in September, November and December - for which he
was paid the amounts of $40.00, $60.00 and $60.00, respectively.
Dana Dyck had been a student at the Royal Winnipeg Ballet for
several years prior to coming to Victoria. On occasion, she
taught classes at Stages as a substitute for Donna Ball-Watson
and was paid the sum of $300.00 - in 1997 - for providing
instructional services during the month of February. Breiland
stated the worker - Bebe Eversfield - was 76 years old in 1997.
She had been a dancer and had operated a dance studio in Victoria
for many years. When her lease expired on the studio premises,
she came to see Breiland who agreed to retain her services to
teach a certain number of classes on days chosen by Eversfield to
suit her schedule. Since students tend to follow a particular
teacher, there were a number of them who followed Eversfield to
the school at Stages. The Royal Academy of Dance, situated in
London, England also has offices in Canada and produces a
syllabus for students wishing to learn a particular style of
dance embraced by that institution. As an example of the detail
set forth in the syllabus for students at various levels of
proficiency, Breiland referred to five separate booklets, filed
collectively as Exhibit A-2. In order to instruct courses
recognized by the Royal Academy, the instructors must pass
certain examinations and receive proper certification prior to
being permitted to teach. Following successful completion of
Grade 5, a student is then eligible to progress through various
levels of instruction, including a form of apprenticeship
involving teaching students entered in competitions, in order to
then attain the status of dance teacher. The process of
certification - and the costs thereof - are borne totally by the
individual teacher and may include payment to a pianist, purchase
of videos and registration fees at workshops and seminars.
Depending on the style of dance, a particular company may prefer
dancers having a certain body shape, such as long legs, short
arms, long neck, small waist, without excess poundage. Breiland
stated Stages has been operating in the same manner since 1982.
Revenue Canada - as it then was - performed a payroll
audit 10 or 11 years ago and, after examining the contracts
signed by the teachers and the overall circumstances surrounding
their working relationship with Stages, decided they were not
employees engaged pursuant to a contract of service. Turning
again to the names listed in Schedule A of the Reply, Breiland
stated Gregory Filler was a working dancer engaged by an
international touring company who also performed on cruise ships
and in hotels. He also taught dance in Japan and other countries
as well as being involved in dancing and choreography for the
Olympics. Craig Hempsted - from Sidney, British Columbia
- is a former student at Stages and received instruction
from Breiland. He has appeared in movies, musicals such as Chorus
Line and Peter Pan, and performs in Las Vegas. Hempsted has also
worked in South Africa, New Zealand and Paris and has performed
in videos and in productions staged on cruise ships. Breiland
explained that when Hempsted was in Sidney, he would telephone
Breiland and advise her that he would be available to teach
classes while waiting for another gig (engagement) and would set
a fee for which he would provide the service. The understanding
with Hempsted was that he would be able to leave - without
notice - if he received a call offering him work elsewhere.
When Hempsted taught at Stages school, Breiland would merely step
aside from teaching the advanced class and allow him to take over
the instruction. Other times, when Hempsted notified her he would
be home for a few days, she would organize a workshop and
students would pay a fee set by Stages in order to attend. Stages
then paid Hempsted a fee for teaching the group. In 1997,
Hempsted was paid the total sum of $1,376.98 by Stages for
providing services in November and December. Another worker
- Sandy Irving - taught modern dance at the Stages
studio only on Saturdays - between 1:00 and 3:00 p.m. -as
she had various other commitments during the week. Breiland
stated Cheryl Jameson had been a former student at Stages and she
contacted Jameson when Gordon Head Recreation Centre required an
instructor to teach a class - called tiny tutu's -
designed for young children. Jameson brought her own sound system
and CD's to the class together with other teaching aids
owned by her. The Recreation Centre requested that Stages provide
the teacher, handle all the necessary administration pertaining
to the instruction of the class and then invoice the Centre.
Breiland stated the most important tools for any dance teacher
were knowledge and experience. In 1998, Stages paid Jameson a
total of $345.00 for teaching the class - during October
and November - at the Centre. David Kitt-MacPherson worked for
Stages as a director for a musical. He had done similar work for
other theatre companies in Victoria and also owned his own
production company. He devised a curriculum partitioned into
blocks and then had the actors rehearse the musical which was
later performed at the McPherson Playhouse in Victoria. Angela
Mousseau - named in the Minister's assessments
- was paid the sum of $15.00 - in 1998 - by Stages.
Breiland stated Mousseau had never provided any services to the
dance school and the amount probably represented a refund of a
deposit on a costume rental. Kirstie Paterson's specialty
was tap dance and singing. She arrived in Victoria from Toronto
and wanted to teach some classes at Stages but only at a
particular time of day. In 1997, she was paid the sum of $262.50
for teaching a few classes during September and October -
comprised of only three students - who were instructed in a back
room within the Stages studio. If class size fell below a certain
number, the policy at Stages was to cancel the class. Krista Rand
took over the class when Kirstie Paterson was injured but when a
cruise line entertainment director telephoned Rand with an offer
of work, she left suddenly after earning only the sum of $255.00.
Morgan Saddington came in to Stages one Saturday as a substitute
for Donna Ball-Watson and earned the sum of $40.00. She brought
her own music, streamers and other teaching material. Jodi Sing
had been teaching at a dance studio operated by Janice McDonald
and, when she agreed to teach some classes at Stages, Breiland
initially paid McDonald on the basis of an invoice being
submitted for Sing's services but later that arrangement
was modified and Stages issued cheques directly to Sing. Duncan
Stewart was a former student at Stages. In 1998, as a vocal
teacher, he instructed students enrolled in a song-and-dance
class. He was there for a short time and earned only the sum of
$360.00 prior to leaving to work at a Shaw Festival. While in
Victoria, Stewart worked for various groups and companies and
would only teach at Stages when his schedule permitted. Airlie
Sturrock took classes at Stages while also teaching at various
recreation centres. She never instructed any students at the
Stages studio on Johnson Street in Victoria. Stages invoiced
Gordon Head Recreation Centre for her services. The Centre
advertised the class and collected the fees from the participants
and the instruction was held on premises owned and operated by
the Centre. Kendra Walker is a teacher at the Royal Winnipeg
Ballet and taught a three-week summer class for Stages during
July, 1997 in return for payment of a fee in the sum of
$3,234.38. Breiland stated the fee was arrived at in the course
of negotiation with Walker who taught a totally different
syllabus than the one adhered to by the Royal Dance Academy. The
three-week course was extremely intensive and, while Stages
accepted enrollments from students, it was Walker who then placed
a student in the most appropriate class, in accordance with the
child's ability within the various levels of instruction
offered for age groups 8-10, 10-12, 12-14 and 14 and older. Donna
Williams was a musician and worked as a Musical Director at St.
Michael's University School. She also performed at Langham
Court Theatre and - at Stages - taught vocal portions of
the song-and-dance class as well as working at the summer ballet
school with Kendra Walker. In the morning, Williams worked as a
teacher at the Toronto Conservatory of Music school in Victoria
and was available for teaching at Stages only during the
afternoon. Breiland would teach the first part of the class and
then Williams would arrive - with her own music - and
proceed to instruct the students for the balance of the class,
using her own teaching methods. Karlie Wilson worked for Stages
- in 1998 - when Airlie Sturrock was injured in a car
accident. At that time, Wilson was a student at Stages and she
took over a class for which she was paid the sum of $15.00 and
that amount was later deducted - by Stages - from a
payment to Sturrock. Magda Wodja had toured around the world as a
magician's assistant. In 1998, she taught several tiny tutu
classes for a fee of $15.00 per full session and earned a total
of $67.50 prior to leaving Victoria for another engagement. Donna
Ball-Watson had been teaching at another dance school in Victoria
and contacted Breiland at Stages with a request that she be hired
to teach 20 hours per week. Later, Bebe Eversfield retired from
teaching and Ball-Watson became the resident ballet instructor at
Stages during 1997 and 1998. Currently, she holds the title of
Director of the Ballet Program. Breiland stated she and
Ball-Watson discussed the size of the classes and the teaching
schedule with the understanding Ball-Watson would be paid at the
rate of $28.00 per hour but payment would be based on actual
hours taught and not for preparation, attendance at workshops or
for any time spent upgrading skills at seminars. Ball-Watson was
in charge of teaching ballet and controlled the choreography. She
also taught dance at the ballet summer schools. She signed a
contract with Stages in which she agreed to provide her services
within the context of being an independent contractor. In the
course of providing her services, if Ball-Watson chose not to
teach on a certain day, that decision was accepted by Stages.
Breiland referred to a contract - Exhibit A-3 -
signed by Ball-Watson, dated September 31 [sic] 1998 and
other contracts signed by: Christie (Wilson) Hamar -
Exhibit A-4 - dated 05/09/98, Kirsten Odermatt - Exhibit
A-5 - dated October 6, 1998 and David MacPherson - Exhibit
A-6 - dated September 22, 1998. Turning to the assumptions
of fact set forth in the Reply to Notice of Appeal -
2000-4258(EI) - at paragraph 5 - Breiland agreed Stages
operated a performing arts school which provided classes for
various styles of dance and for musical theatre programs but
stated the classes were dependent on satisfactory enrollment and
on availability of qualified instructors. The instructors were
hired to instruct the dance and musical theatre classes but there
was no control exercised by anyone in management at Stages over
the manner or method by which the instruction was delivered.
Breiland agreed the regular advertising - usually carried
out in September - was decided upon and paid for by Stages
but the school added Donna Ball-Watson's picture and career
information to the advertisement. Other instructors advertised
their services in a variety of ways but word of mouth remained
the best form of advertising for the teachers and the dance
school. As for the determination of what classes would be offered
within a particular instruction schedule, Breiland explained the
operation of the dance studio was based on communicating with the
teachers who would inform her about the type of classes they
wanted to teach and the times when they were available to carry
out the necessary instruction. Ball-Watson re-arranged class
times in order to accommodate her schedule. Stages determined the
rates for enrollment in classes, collected the fees for the
various programs and provided the premises at which the
instruction was carried out. The studio was equipped with barres,
mirrors, sound system and related equipment but instructors did
provide services at other venues which were not owned by Stages.
Breiland disagreed with the assumption - at paragraph 5(g) of the
Reply - that Stages set the dates, the program and the costume
design for the dance recitals because the scheduling was affected
by the availability of a venue. Further, the teachers were
responsible for the costumes which were created by the parents of
students and Ball-Watson rented long scarves from another dance
company and collected money from the students to cover the cost.
All teachers involved in a recital had input into the process and
Breiland denied the assumption - at (5(h) - that Stages
directed the workers with respect to the curriculum of each of
the respective dance styles. She stated she had no knowledge of
the Royal Academy curriculum, a discipline followed by
Ball-Watson in teaching her students. In 1997 and 1998, the
teachers prepared reports to be provided to the parents of
students and if a problem arose between a student and a teacher,
then the parent would communicate with Breiland but otherwise
there was not much contact between her and the parents. The
Minister assumed - at 5(k) - that Stages took credit
for all the performances and successes of the students and
Breiland agreed the school was proud of the accomplishments of
former students but added that individual teachers were also
possessive of their contribution to that success. A brochure
- Exhibit A-7 - prepared by Ball-Watson for a summer
ballet program - in 1999 - set forth her qualifications and
achievements in ballet. Breiland stated she did not have to
approve any extra rehearsal time and any scheduling changes were
discussed with the relevant teachers. The rate of pay for the
teachers was not established unilaterally by Stages but was the
product of negotiation, as illustrated by the discussions with
Ball-Watson who wanted to be paid at the rate of $30.00 per hour
but agreed to accept the sum of $27.00, later increased to
$28.00. The teachers were paid only for actual class time and
recorded their own working hours which Stages accepted and used
as a base for payment. Breiland agreed teachers were required to
notify her if they were unable to instruct their class and when
an instructor found a replacement it was obvious to that person
- and to Breiland - that the substitute had to be
similarly qualified and, if no proper substitute could be found,
then the class was cancelled and a make-up class was scheduled.
Breiland agreed that Stages paid for the Workers'
Compensation Board (WCB) coverage but stated that is normal
business practice even when services are being provided by
independent contractors. She referred to the relevant form
- Exhibit A-8 - entitled: Employer Payroll and
Contract Labour Report for 1997. On that form - at Line H
- there is a category for reporting the earnings of
subcontractors. Breiland stated the teachers at Stages did not
participate in any medical or dental plans or in any similar type
of benefit plan. Her experience within the dance school business
led her to conclude that the operation of Stages would be greatly
impaired in the event the teachers were seen to be employees
since the relevant provincial labour legislation requires people
to be paid a minimum of four hours if called in to work. Breiland
stated it is not physically possible for teachers to deliver that
amount of instruction in a day and some classes - for young
students - must not extend beyond 45 minutes. In that
sense, Breiland stated the structure of the business does not
accord with the traditional sense of an employer/employee working
relationship. The business aspect was administered by Stages and
the teachers did not bear any administrative or other costs
pertaining to the operation of the business. In the event a
particular parent did not pay the requisite fee, then that amount
would not be deducted from the remuneration paid to the teacher
of that student but if too many students were removed from a
class - due to non-payment or otherwise - then the
class would be cancelled without any compensation to the
instructor. Some teachers did research on the Internet while
others referred to study materials or listened to music. The
amount of preparation for teaching a class varied and, if a class
ran over the allotted time, there was no extra payment made by
Stages. Ball-Watson paid membership fees to the Royal Academy,
purchased CD's and books and bore the costs associated with
any training or upgrading. Any costs of props or materials for
productions or recitals purchased by Ball-Watson would be paid by
the parents - through billing by Stages - and she
would then be reimbursed. Since none of the instructors at Stages
earned more than $30,000 during the relevant period, there was no
requirement for anyone to become a registrant for purposes of the
Goods and Services Tax (GST). Stages was required to collect GST
only if the students were beyond a certain age but the majority
of instruction provided by the school was exempt from tax.
Counsel referred Breiland to the Reply to Notice of Appeal filed
in 2000-4255(EI) in response to the appeal from the decision of
the Minister that Ball-Watson had been engaged in pensionable and
insurable employment with Stages from January 1, 1999 to January
7, 2000. At paragraph 4(f), Breiland disagreed with the
assumption that the worker had been hired to teach any form of
dance other than ballet and went on to disagree with the
assumptions contained in 4(g) and 4(h), stating that Ball-Watson
provided the progress reports - on the students' abilities
- to the student and their families and explained that any
matters arising from those reports would be dealt with directly
by Ball-Watson. However, if it concerned payment of fees, then it
was the responsibility of Stages to deal with the problem.
[8]
In cross-examination, Kim Breiland agreed she was the owner
- through her corporation - of the dance school and
stated it provided her with a modest income but the business
- like others engaged in the same field of endeavour - did
not produce large amounts of revenue. She teaches jazz classes -
5 days a week - to children of various ages and to older students
up to age 21. She did not attend classes instructed by other
teachers. She considered herself - and the person fulfilling the
role of Office Manager - as the only employees of Stages. In the
beginning, she had operated the school without having any other
instructors. Later, many of the teachers at Stages were her
former students or colleagues. She stated Stages became involved
in ballet instruction because Bebe Eversfield wanted to relocate
her classes due to the expiration of a lease on premises at which
she had operated a ballet instruction school. Christie (Wilson)
Hamar, who had been teaching an Irish Dancing class at Gordon
Head Recreation Centre, suggested to Breiland that Stages operate
a similar class at the studio. Breiland accepted the proposal and
the relevant instruction was provided until that fad passed from
the public fancy. In order to determine whether a particular
course will be offered to students, Breiland stated she has to
calculate the costs associated with delivery of the required
instruction and then fix a fee which will be attractive to the
parents who will be paying the bills. Stages has never had to
discharge or replace an instructor and no contract had ever been
terminated nor has she ever meted out any discipline to any
teacher. Breiland was referred to Exhibit A-3 - the
contract with Ball-Watson - and to clause 2, which stated a
teacher required the approval of the Artistic Director prior
to any substitution being allowed. Breiland held the position of
Artistic Director and in that role wanted to be notified of any
changes from an administrative standpoint in order to avoid
double booking, rather than for purposes of control, per
se. For the same reason, clause 4 was inserted to avoid
conflict over the use of space which was limited to three rooms.
As a result, any additional class time or alterations to regular
class time had to be dealt with by the front office prior to
being discussed with the student or parent. The reference to
student/parent notices - in clause 5 - required written notices
being provided to any alterations in the regular class schedule.
In practice, Breiland stated Ball-Watson wrote her own notices to
parents but Stages had generated the form of the notice. The
intent of clause 6 requiring a teacher to refrain from
approaching a student in order to have them change and/or add
classes to their existing class schedule - without discussion of
the matter with Breiland and/or the Stages office - was to avoid
the situation where a child would advise a parent he or she was
moving upwards to another class - requiring more time, money and
expensive footwear - without having precise details to provide to
the parent. Breiland agreed clause 7 required any and all
costumes and alterations to same - for any of the Stages'
productions - to have approval from the office or from her, as
Artistic Director. However, Breiland stated that - in practice -
she did not exercise any right of approval in the classes or in
the staging of recitals. Clause 8 required that any individual
attending a class had to be a student in good standing at the
school or a drop-in attendee who had paid in advance at the
Stages office. An attendance list was maintained so the office
could confirm to a parent that a student was physically present
in the class at the designated time. Students who were brought
into a class by a teacher should have been registered with the
office but that rule was not always observed. Clause 9 required
the teachers to "present themselves appropriately and in so
doing set an example for their students". Breiland agreed
it was important to the school that teachers dress appropriately
and to be concerned with safety within the class from the
standpoint of not wearing garments and accessories that could be
potentially harmful in the course of dancing. Clause 10,
pertaining to the arrival into a class of a guest teacher and/or
choreographer - at the discretion of Stages - was crossed
out by Ball-Watson but applied to the contracts of other
teachers. Clause 11 expressed Breiland's philosophy of
avoiding intense competition among young children and against
other dance studios, and the requirement - clause 12
- that Stages be given credit for performances of students
in all productions or performances involving students from the
school was not adhered to in practice even though many dancers
from Stages performed elsewhere. Teachers were required to pay
their own expenses - clause 13 - unless otherwise
approved by Breiland. The status of independent contractor was
set forth in clause 14 where it was clearly stated Stages would
not be making any deductions for income tax, Canada Pension Plan
or unemployment insurance. Teachers were required to observe
certain matters in confidence and were also required to support
the policies and procedures of Stages as outlined in the
Registration Manual and other documentation. Breiland explained
the jazz and tap teachers had input into the contents of said
manual and the standard contract with Ball-Watson - also
signed by other teachers - was regarded by her as mainly
for administrative purposes and to aid in an efficient operation
of the school. Although the contract - clause 17 -
required teachers to enter their hours of work into the time
sheet book located in the office, most teachers did not do so and
merely recorded their own hours which were then turned in to the
office for payment at the relevant rate. The rate per hour and
schedule of classes applicable to Ball-Watson was set out in
clause 21. The ability - of Stages - to terminate the contract by
giving one month's written notice was never exercised and,
while there was no requirement to do so, Breiland preferred that
instructors would advise her if they chose not to teach in the
future. She disagreed with the suggestion that the students
"belonged" to Stages and stated some teachers
advertised their services to the public and used the premises at
the school to carry out any resulting private instruction.
Breiland identified the Stages Registration Manual &
Guidelines 1999-2000 Season - Exhibit R-1 - and
agreed it referred - on page 4 - to the teachers as
being part of the Faculty. Earlier, at page 3, Breiland had
written a President's Message in which the achievements of
former students at the school were recognized. In terms of
enrolling students in classes, Breiland stated she encouraged
interested parties to attend a class on a drop-in basis and
invited them to meet the teacher prior to enrolling on a
full-time basis. If a student is accompanied by other family
members wishing to participate in instruction, a discount will be
offered by Stages. Any parents or students wishing to take
lessons at the Johnson Street studio of Stages must register with
the front office, as teachers merely teach and do not become
involved in the administrative aspects of running the school as a
business. In the event only one or two students from a class of
15 dropped out, there would be no reduction in pay to the
instructor. Breiland agreed that, although she attempts to
operate the school largely on the basis of achieving consensus,
she had the ultimate authority to make decisions concerning the
courses offered at the school. Breiland stated the contract with
Ball-Watson was the standard agreement offered to all the
teachers and had been designed by her husband who was the Office
Manager. Prior to signing the contract - Exhibit A-3 -,
Ball-Watson had wanted certain amendments to the usual form and
these were accepted by Breiland.
[9]
Kirsten Odermatt testified she is the appellant in appeals
2000-4572(EI) and 2000-4573(CPP). She resides in Victoria
and works as an accountant. As a three-year old, she started to
take dancing lessons and continued thereafter for many years. She
has worked as a dancer on cruise ships for three years and was
the Front-of-House Manager at McPherson Playhouse in Victoria.
When the regular tap teacher at Stages was injured, Odermatt
taught the class and on another occasion assumed conduct of a
certain class when the regular teacher left suddenly to accept a
position as an entertainer on a cruise line. Odermatt explained
that courses were held at premises other than the studio on
Johnson Street and she taught at the Gordon Head Recreation
Centre on Saturday afternoons and one night during the week. The
class size was dependent - to some extent - on the
age of the participants and a class of 10 was the practical limit
if composed of students aged 9-10. Older students could
participate in a larger class but Odermatt still preferred the
smaller class size. She acknowledged that Stages registered the
students and collected the fees but regarded the establishment of
her hourly rate of pay as having been arrived at through
negotiation. The front office at Stages was utilized as a message
centre but she still had the right to discuss matters directly
with students and/or parents. In her view, it was natural for
Stages - and for individual teachers - to take pride
in the accomplishments of students. She agreed she would not
suffer a loss if some parent or older student had attempted to
pay a fee with an NSF cheque or if there was money due to Stages
for past instruction. She handled all aspects of costume designs
and also had input regarding the program to be offered at various
recitals. In her experience as a teacher at Stages, there was no
control exercised over extra rehearsal time provided there was
space available. She also taught her own students on a one-to-one
basis - using school premises - under an arrangement
whereby the parents paid her directly without any involvement by
Stages and she paid no fee or rental charge to Stages for use of
the room. At all times, she recorded her own working hours and
did not attend at the office for the purpose of filling out the
time sheet. In her working career, Odermatt stated she had
regarded herself as an independent contractor while working as an
entertainer for a cruise line - usually under a contract of
6 months duration - and when providing her services to Stages.
However, when she had been working for the management company
which provided her services to McPherson Playhouse, she had been
an employee.
[10] In
cross-examination, Kirsten Odermatt stated she agreed to be bound
by the provisions of the contract - Exhibit A-5 -
that she had signed on October 6, 1998. Pursuant to that
agreement, she agreed she was accountable to Stages and had to
find a qualified assistant - subject to approval by
Breiland - before she could have someone substitute for
her. Overall, Odermatt stated she regarded the administrative
facilities of Stages as a resource to handle delivery of notices
to students and/or parents and the office was not seen by her as
an imposition. Stages did not dictate her method of instruction
and she received credit for having choreographed certain pieces
within a recital. She purchased her own music and bore the cost
of certain costume expenses in the event all the parents did not
pay the student's share. She understood she would be
required to provide music, her own tap shoes and certain props.
The classes at the Recreation Centre were arranged through Stages
but she discussed the scheduling with Breiland including the
amalgamation of all classes - in 1998 - to a time set
for each Wednesday.
[11] Christie
Hamar - formerly Wilson - testified she is the
appellant in appeals 2000-4593(EI) and 2000-4594(CPP). Hamar
stated her mother was a dancer and had started her in dance at an
early age. She went on to work professionally as a dancer and a
teacher. Breiland contacted her as a result of having spoken to a
mutual acquaintance. In an effort to create work, Hamar created a
program which became the subject of an advertisement -
Exhibit A-9 - published by Stages. Breiland -
together with the Recreation Centre - agreed to proceed
with the program as devised by Hamar. As a consequence, she
disagreed with the Minister's assumption at paragraph 4(c)
of the Reply to her Notice of Appeal that it was Stages that
provided the premises at which the programs - taught by her -
were held. The administrative aspects of collecting fees and
registering students were undertaken by Stages but she was free
to deal directly with students and parents in her role as a
teacher. She had full control over costume design and had input
into the programs which were dependent on the availability of a
suitable venue. She did not find Stages had exercised control
over approving certain rehearsal time in the studio in which she
also taught her own students and was paid directly by the parent.
She had negotiated her hourly rate with Breiland and recorded her
own hours of work. Throughout, she regarded herself as being in
the business of offering dance instruction and during the
relevant period had taught classes in at least 10 other schools
while fulfilling her obligations to Stages pursuant to the
contract. Her fee to teach classes in schools was based on an
hourly rate of $20.00 together with travel expenses, if required.
She relied on word of mouth advertising and considered herself to
be a professional dance teacher carrying on her own business. She
would invoice the various schools and clients for whom she
provided her services.
[12] In
cross-examination, Christie Hamar agreed students tend to follow
a teacher to another venue. According to the contract, she was
required to notify Breiland of any need for a substitute and
would notify her of the person chosen. Breiland, relying on her
experience, would then accept her decision. When there was need
to amend a schedule, she would notify the front office so the
Manager would be aware of the changes.
[13] Donna
Ball-Watson testified she resides in Victoria and works as a
ballet teacher. She is the person affected by the decision issued
by the Minister on September 14, 2000 that became the subject of
an appeal - 2000-4255(EI) - by Stages. She has taught
ballet for 30 years and, as an advanced member of the Royal Dance
Academy, is entitled to use the designation: ARDA. During her
career, she has also performed as a dancer and, prior to teaching
at Stages, worked as an instructor at another dance school. In
1995, she met Kim Breiland and discussed a teaching opportunity
- one day per week - at Stages' studio. Later,
in 1997 - when Bebe Eversfield retired - Ball-Watson
assumed her duties and this additional responsibility increased
Ball-Watson's teaching time to 20 hours per week based on 4
to 5 classes per day. During her working relationship with
Stages, she stated she had always accepted that Stages could fire
her for due cause in the sense of being able to apply standards
relevant to a member of any other profession. Most of the class
schedule had been established prior to her arrival at Stages
school but classes undergo some modification on an annual basis.
Ball-Watson - and the other teachers - had
input into scheduling which was significant because some students
took more than one class in different styles of dance during the
same day. However, Breiland had final approval over scheduling.
Ball-Watson was paid the sum of $28.00 per hour, an amount
arrived at following negotiation with Breiland. Stages recorded
her hours of work and absences were noted in a book maintained in
the office. Otherwise, it was merely presumed the full schedule
- as blocked out - had been met and payment was based on
the total number of hours set out therein. She was not required
to submit an invoice to Stages in order to receive payment for
her services. Ball-Watson stated she found it difficult to find a
replacement to teach her advanced classes but - with
Breiland's assistance - a qualified substitute would
eventually be found, in most cases. Ball-Watson stated Breiland
had the ability to approve any replacement teacher but they were
both acutely aware of the level of skill required on the part of
any substitute teacher. Ball-Watson stated she was able to earn
additional money by teaching students prior to examinations or by
teaching at workshops but Stages still issued cheques to her for
payment of those extra duties. In Ball-Watson's opinion,
there was no real supervision exercised by Breiland but she was
the founder of the school and it operated in accordance with her
vision. Ball-Watson identified the contract - Exhibit A-3
- as the agreement she had signed at the end of September,
1998. The procedure followed was for a new contract to be signed
each September, applicable to the ensuing school year. She always
considered herself bound by the policies and procedures of Stages
and would not have presumed to bypass the front office by sending
out notices directly to students and/or parents. The dance school
- in the manner of other educational institutions -
operated pursuant to a schedule and Ball-Watson stated she was
required to contact Breiland prior to undertaking any amendments
to the schedule. In her view - generally - it made good
sense not to discuss matters with the students and/or parents
until any changes or additions had been approved by Breiland.
However, there were a few occasions upon which Ball-Watson
had discussed a change in level of instruction with a student
prior to having raised the matter with Breiland. The cost of
costumes was a concern to Breiland but not the style or design.
As for the need to verify that all persons attending a class were
fully paid up students or drop-ins, Ball-Watson stated she
disciplined herself to verify - with the office - that the
appropriate fee had been paid. She did not teach any students
other than those enrolled through the office at Stages. As
closely as possible, Stages observed the same calendar as the
public school system and part of her job was to become involved
in certain productions which were staged during the year. The
Office Manager was concerned only with administrative aspects of
the business as opposed to the artistic component of the
operation. Ball-Watson stated she would not consider leaving
Stages and attempting to take students with her to a new venue as
that would be unethical conduct. Her payment was based on an
hourly rate and remained the same whether the class had 5
students or 15 but, in order to make it worthwhile for Stages,
the class size had to be adequate to meet the cost. She had never
suffered any loss due to non-payment by any parent or student.
Compared to other teachers, she had the most contact with
Breiland since they were on the premises together more often than
the other 7 or 8 instructors. As for expenses, Ball-Watson
estimated she spent between $300-$500 per year on CD's
because the budget set by Stages - for CD acquisition - was
sometimes not adequate to meet her needs.
[14] In
cross-examination, Donna Ball-Watson stated she did not consider
herself as indispensable to the Stages ballet program but agreed
there were not many teachers in the Victoria region as qualified
as her. During the course of her working relationship with
Stages, Breiland would not make certain decisions without
consulting her and they both tended to operate the school through
consensus - especially when dealing with parents of students
- since it was basically a "people business".
On the other hand, Ball-Watson was not involved in any aspect of
financial or business matters pertaining to the school such as
setting the fees or collecting them. She stated she regarded the
teaching of ballet as a career and has stayed the course -
despite inadequate levels of remuneration - and since her
arrival at Stages has not worked elsewhere. Even when holding a
workshop or teaching at a summer school program, her services
were still provided to Stages. She was aware that teachers could
advertise their services but if there was any connection with
Stages, that had to be made plain. Ball-Watson instructed only in
the discipline of ballet and wrote progress reports relating to
students and Stages then provided them to the parents. On
occasion, she would deal with concerns of a student or his or her
parent(s) but it was usually handled by Breiland or the front
office. The dates of recitals were tied to the availability of a
suitable venue and the dates for examinations were set by the
Royal Academy and not Stages. Breiland - technically
- had to approve any extra rehearsal time but she almost
always agreed with Ball-Watson's requests. She recognized
that she was required to inform Breiland if she were unable to
instruct one of her scheduled classes. Her payment was based on a
print-out of teaching hours in accordance with the established
schedule and the number of hours could vary from day to day -
especially as examination time drew near - but that was
considered by her to be normal within the ambit of the dance
teachers' profession. Since she was not paid for any
preparation time or for additional instruction to prepare
students for examinations, the effect was to reduce the overall
rate of pay per hour. She was responsible to pay her own
membership fees to the Royal Academy but Stages reimbursed her
for any long distance telephone calls concerning matters within
the purview of the Academy as they related to the school.
Ball-Watson stated she reported her income - from Stages
- on the basis that she was a self-employed person but
always felt as though she was an employee of the school -
holding the title of Director of Ballet - rather than an
independent contractor. In terms of deductibility of expenses
relating to the production of income, she found little difference
between the two different categories except that one did not
require deductions for Canada Pension Plan or employment
insurance. At an earlier stage in her professional career, she
had also been the owner of a dance school.
[15] At the
conclusion of the evidence, counsel for Stages conceded that
Donna Ball-Watson was an employee employed under a
contract of service during the relevant period covered by the
assessments. Counsel also agreed the decision of the Minister
finding her to be engaged in both pensionable and insurable
employment with Stages from January 1, 1999 to January 7, 2000
should be confirmed by the Court.
[16] Counsel
for the respondent conceded the following persons should be
deleted from the assessment for 1997:
Kirstie Paterson
Tim Crofton
Paul Becker
Krista Rand
Morgan Saddington
Magda Wodja
Dana Dyck
[17] Counsel
for the respondent also conceded the following persons should be
deleted from the assessment for 1998:
Cheryl Jameson
Magda Wodja
Angela Mousseau
Duncan Stewart
[18] Counsel
for the appellants submitted the persons remaining in the
assessments for both years should be regarded as independent
contractors in that they were providing services of a
professional nature within the context of operating their own
business. In counsel's view of the evidence, the generic
assumptions of the Minister attempted to create an atmosphere
marked by a substantial degree of control having been exercised
by Stages - through Breiland - but this theory had
not been supported by the testimony of several witnesses. Counsel
submitted it is extremely difficult for the Minister to issue
what is - in effect - a decision confirming a blanket
ruling on insurability when the circumstances surrounding the
working relationship varied from teacher to teacher.
[19] Counsel
for the respondent submitted the assumptions of the Minister were
still fundamentally intact at the end of the day notwithstanding
that certain observations, opinions or explanations had been
given by various witnesses concerning some aspects of the working
relationship. Counsel pointed out that the mere fact someone
provided services for only a few days - here and there - does not
transform that person into an independent contractor, especially
in light of the new regime in place - since June 30, 1996 - where
each hour of work is now eligible for inclusion in the
calculations pertaining to entitlement for benefits pursuant to
the Act and Regulations thereunder.
[20] In light
of the concessions made by both counsel at the conclusion of the
evidence, I could have recited those at the beginning of these
reasons and excluded the testimony of witnesses bearing on the
status of these individuals. I resisted - with some difficulty -
the temptation to cut to the chase in that regard because I found
it helpful to examine the evidence as it unfolded and think it
can assist in the difficult process of fine-tuning the measuring
device that must be applied to the overall working relationship
between each worker and Stages. I find it serves to focus on
differences - sometimes subtle - which, when
considered in total, can result in the finding of a different
status for certain workers even though all of them would appear
- at first blush - to be governed by similar
circumstances.
[21] In
Wiebe Door Services Ltd. v. M.N.R. [1986] 2 C.T.C. 200,
the Federal Court of Appeal approved subjecting the evidence to
the following tests, with the admonition that the tests be
regarded as a four-in-one test with emphasis on the combined
force of the whole scheme of operations. The tests are:
1. The control test
2. Ownership of tools
3. Chance of profit and risk of loss
4. The integration test
Control:
[22]
Generally, there was not much control exercised over the various
individuals involved in delivering instruction to students
registered with Stages. That is usually the case when the worker
is possessed of particular skills not shared by the payor. In the
within appeals, Kim Breiland was a qualified dance teacher in
jazz and tap but was not familiar with the requirements relating
to some specific forms of ballet instruction. While the dance
school operated through a benign consensus model, Breiland still
had the ultimate authority over a variety of matters as they
impacted upon the efficient operation of the school that she had
founded. The requirement to obtain an approved replacement and to
adhere to established schedules is not unusual within the context
of a teaching institution or business. Certain individuals were
subject to more control - or to the right of Stages to control
their delivery of instruction - than others and I will deal
with the workers individually.
[23] Lia
Biros: She was not present during the hearing and the only source
of information I have concerning this worker was the testimony of
Breiland. The Notice of Intervention filed by Biros stated that
she had entered into a contract with Stages wherein it had been
expressly agreed that the association would be one of contractor
and independent contractor. The Minister's Reply to the
Notice of Intervention merely denied that allegation and the
assumptions of fact contained in the Reply to Notice of Appeal
- 2000-4258(EI) - do not relate specifically to Biros.
Indeed, the opposite is true. The Minister assumed - at
paragraph 5(f) - that Stages provided the premises at which
the programs were taught. That assumption is not correct since
Biros taught at the Gordon Head Recreation Centre on Saturday
afternoons through an arrangement between management of the
Centre and Breiland. The assumptions concerning progress reports,
curriculum, notifications to parents and many others had no
relevance - whatsoever - to this particular worker
and there is no indication any control was ever exercised over
this individual nor is there any evidence the right to do so
existed.
[24] Bebe
Eversfield: This individual was a highly skilled teacher who had
owned her own dance school for many years. When she came to
Stages - bringing many of her former students - she
began to fulfill the role of the instructor in ballet, a
discipline not previously offered at the school. As a person
greatly admired by Breiland, Eversfield was able to arrange
suitable working hours in accordance with her self-assessment as
to her capabilities. She occupied the position later assumed
- and expanded - by Donna Ball-Watson.
[25] David
Kitt-MacPherson was paid by Stages to direct a musical. The
evidence was that he devised his own curriculum into 8 blocks so
he could rehearse it in segments which could be assembled later
and then included in the overall production which was held at the
McPherson Playhouse. The assumptions contained in the Reply -
referred to earlier - did not have much relevance to the working
relationship between this worker and Stages and one does not know
if his remuneration was based on an hourly rate or on achieving a
certain result. Overall, there is no evidence that his work was
controlled in any manner by Stages. Breiland testified that he
owned his own production business and also worked at certain
theatres in Victoria.
[26] Donna
Williams: This worker had other occupations and taught at other
institutions. She was available to teach an afternoon class at
Stages - after satisfying her other commitments - and used
her own music and followed her own teaching methods while
teaching the vocal portion of the song and dance class. Breiland
taught the dance component and there is no evidence she exercised
any control over Williams. Instead, she adapted her own teaching
schedule while awaiting the arrival of Williams to finish the
class with the vocal part of the instruction. She also was an
accompanist at the summer ballet school.
[27] Airlie
Sturrock: This individual had been a student at Stages and taught
a class at the Gordon Head Recreation Centre. The Centre
advertised the class and collected the fees. Stages provided
Sturrock as the instructor and then invoiced the Centre. Sturrock
never taught a class at the Stages premises. There is no indicia
of control concerning this person's delivery of
services.
[28] Jodi
Sing: She had been working as a teacher at another dance studio
in Victoria. The owner of that business sent her to Stages and
her teaching services - for some period of time -
were remunerated by Stages paying an invoice submitted by
Sing's employer, the owner of the other studio. Later, Sing
was paid directly by Stages but there is no evidence she ever
ceased to be an employee of the other entity. Certainly, there is
no indication she was subject to any control by Breiland on
behalf of Stages.
[29] Sandy
Irving: In 1997, Stages paid this individual the sum of $330.00;
$90.00 in January and the sum of $120.00 in February and March.
She taught modern dance one day a week on Saturday afternoons
from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. and had various other sources of income
from her occupation as a dancer and teacher. There is no evidence
this worker was subject to any requirements to fit into the
regular weekday pattern as might be the case with other teachers
who were on the premises during the week.
[30] Christie
(Wilson) Hamar: This worker generated income from a variety of
sources and regarded herself as a self-employed professional who
had created a particular program and then convinced Breiland to
offer it to students at the Gordon Head Recreation Centre. She
also taught students at the studio in the Stages premises and was
involved with observing the policies and procedures of the school
as they related to the administrative aspects of delivering
instruction to students. She would notify Breiland if a
substitute was required and Breiland would rely on her judgment
to find a suitable replacement. Hamar adhered to the policy
- and contractual obligation - by informing Stages of
any desired scheduling changes.
[31] Kendra
Walker: She taught a summer school ballet program organized by
Stages but followed a totally different syllabus than the Royal
Dance Academy. The 3-week course was intensive and was
administered by Stages in terms of accepting enrollment and
collecting the fees.
[32] Gregory
Filler: He was a working dancer on the cruise ships. In July,
1997, Filler was in Victoria and taught at Stages for two weeks
before leaving for another gig. He was an experienced dancer and
choreographer. There is no evidence to suggest that he was
subject to any control by Breiland.
[33] Craig
Hempsted: He was an experienced dancer and performer, having
appeared in musical productions, videos and movies as well as
entertaining on cruise ships. When he was home in Sidney, British
Columbia - 30 kilometers from Victoria - he would telephone
Breiland and they would arrange for a workshop comprised of
advanced students to be held and - in return for an agreed
fee - he taught the students who were sometimes hurriedly
enrolled by Stages. Other times, while teaching a regular class
of advanced students, Breiland merely stepped aside when Hempsted
arrived at the school and permitted him to teach the students.
The staging of the class was solely dependent on Hempsted's
availability with the clear understanding that, if he were to be
called away to perform other work, he would leave immediately. He
was regarded by Breiland as a guest lecturer or teacher and not
as part of her operation.
Tools:
[34] This test
is not particularly significant since the main tool for a dance
- or vocal - teacher or director is skill and experience.
Some of the individuals utilized their own music and source
materials, including teaching aids but the use of these items was
well within the usual parameters recognized by the jurisprudence
as being tools of a personal nature that would ordinarily be
supplied by the worker as a matter of preference apart from any
demands arising from the nature of the working relationship.
Donna Williams - presumably - did not carry in her
own piano each time she arrived at Stages. Therefore, this
significant tool - owned by Stages - was utilized by her
both during the regular classes and during the summer school when
she worked with Kendra Walker.
Chance of profit and risk of loss
[35] Overall,
there was very little chance of profit and an even smaller risk
of loss for most of the teachers. However, those individuals who
had other clients or institutions at which they delivered
instruction, had to choose between providing services to Stages
rather than to others as part of the process of generating
income. There were some expenses incurred that were not paid by
Stages pertaining to the purchase of music, costumes or teaching
material but the evidence does not establish this to have been
significant. There was evidence that Stages handled the
registration of students, the establishment of fees and the
subsequent collection thereof which - in the event of
partial default by some participants - did not affect the
earlier agreed-upon amount paid to the teacher. Those teachers,
who had other more lucrative sources of revenue, protected
themselves from any reduction in potential income by advising
Breiland - up front - that they would leave
Vancouver Island (insofar as the ferry schedule and limited
outbound airplane departures would permit) in the local
equivalent of a New York minute should a better opportunity
present itself during the brief period within which they had
agreed to provide their services to Stages. In my view, the
nature of the service has to be examined and there is not the
same opportunity for profit nor any real risk of loss in those
situations when a professional agrees to provide a service over a
short term in return for a pre-arranged fee. This is certainly
the case when the service provided is dependent on the
application of personal skills to the required task, under
circumstances where there is no significant expense attached to
the supply of the service. A singer, dancer, musician or other
performer is - due to the nature of the business - usually
itinerant and will not be subject to ordinary fixed and variable
costs - in the form of overhead - usually associated with an
income-generating activity.
Integration
[36] This test
is one of the most difficult to apply. At page 206 of his
judgment in Wiebe, supra, MacGuigan, J.A.
stated:
"Of course, the organization test of Lord Denning and
others produces entirely acceptable results when properly
applied, that is, when the question of organization or
integration is approached from the persona of the
"employee" and not from that of the
"employer," because it is always too easy from the
superior perspective of the larger enterprise to assume that
every contributing cause is so arranged purely for the
convenience of the larger entity. We must keep in mind that it
was with respect to the business of the employee that Lord Wright
addressed the question "Whose business is it?"
Perhaps the best synthesis found in the authorities is that of
Cooke, J. in Market Investigations, Ltd. v. Minister of Social
Security, [1968] 3 All. E.R. 732 at 738-39:
The observations of Lord Wright, of Denning L.J., and of the
judges of the Supreme Court in the U.S.A. suggest that the
fundamental test to be applied is this: "Is the person who
has engaged himself to perform these services performing them as
a person in business on his own account?" If the answer to
that question is "yes," then the contract is a contract
for services. If the answer is "no" then the contract
is a contract of service. No exhaustive list has been compiled
and perhaps no exhaustive list can be compiled of considerations
which are relevant in determining that question, nor can strict
rules be laid down as to the relative weight which the various
considerations should carry in particular cases. The most that
can be said is that control will no doubt always have to be
considered, although it can no longer be regarded as the sole
determining factor; and that factors, which may be of importance,
are such matters as whether the man performing the services
provides his own equipment, whether he hires his own helpers,
what degree of financial risk be taken, what degree of
responsibility for investment and management he has, and whether
and how far he has an opportunity of profiting from sound
management in the performance of his task. The application of the
general test may be easier in a case where the person who engages
himself to perform the services does so in the course of an
already established business of his own; but this factor is not
decisive, and a person who engages himself to perform services
for another may well be an independent contractor even though he
has not entered into the contract in the course of an existing
business carried on by him.
There is no escape for the trial judge, when confronted with
such a problem, from carefully weighing all of the relevant
factors, as outlined by Cooke, J."
[37] In the
within appeals, there are a variety of circumstances which were
not addressed by the generic assumption of facts upon which the
Minister apparently relied in making the assessments. For
example, Stages paid David Kitt-MacPherson to direct a musical
which was not performed at the dance school studio but at the
McPherson Playhouse, a venue for live theatre in downtown
Victoria. It is reasonable to assume that the last few rehearsals
took place there. There is no other evidence concerning the rate
or method of remuneration except for the sheet - Exhibit
A-1 - which sets out that he earned between $150.00 and
$280.00 per month during 1997 and 1998. The
assumptions of the Minister - if they are meant to apply to
this worker - are not helpful. It is apparent
Kitt-MacPherson was not a dance teacher integrated into the
regular teaching schedule at the Stages studio. There was no
curriculum for him to follow except the one he devised for
purposes of streamlining rehearsal procedures. He may have agreed
to work for a fixed sum, payable in increments or through a
system of advances. In the event the Minister wishes to obtain
the benefit of assumptions of fact, then they should have some
marginal - at least - application to the person
affected by the decision or assessment. The worker - Kirstie
Paterson - taught some classes in tap dance during
September and October, 1997, earning a total of $262.50. The
studio at Stages was used but the class had only three students
and seems to have been arranged in order to accommodate
Paterson's schedule since she had arrived from Toronto and
was interested in teaching a certain class at a specified time of
day. It is difficult to see her as part of the overall operation
of Stages. Krista Rand assumed the teaching duties of Paterson,
who had sustained an injury. Rand testified she had worked on
cruise ships and was considered to be an independent contractor
while carrying out that task. There was no evidence concerning
the circumstance of those working relationships and maybe she
would be considered an employee under Canadian law but that is
not the point. She regarded herself as a self-employed
professional, able to contract with others to provide her
services - at a rate to be negotiated - in accordance with
her own schedule. Jodi Sing had been working for another dance
studio and - at some point - was loaned out to Stages
and her remuneration was paid to the owner of the other studio.
Later, Stages paid Sing directly but it is unclear whether she
remained subject to the control of the owner of the other studio
or whether she was ever integrated into the business operations
of Stages. Sandy Irving earned the sum of $330.00 from Stages -
in 1997 - during the period from January to March. She taught
modern dance on Saturday afternoon and had other commitments. The
evidence permits no conclusion on whether she was an employee at
another school or if she taught dance on her own account to her
own clients when not teaching at Stages. Jodi Sing appears to be
the person shown on Exhibit A-1 as Renee Sing and -
assuming that is correct - she earned the sum of $488.00 in
1998. Certainly, the assumptions of fact relied on by the
Minister concerning the curriculum and progress reports and
substitution approval seem not to have any application with
respect to this worker. Christie (Wilson) Hamar created a
particular dance program and brought the idea to Breiland. She
taught at the Gordon head Recreation Centre and it was the Centre
that organized the class, collected the fees and administered the
program. The evidence is more consistent with Hamar and Stages
being co-venturers in this particular project since it was
obviously not part of the normal business of the dance studio.
Hamar regarded herself as a teaching professional who taught at
10 schools during the period she was teaching at Stages. She
invoiced those other clients at an hourly rate and charged
travelling expenses, if needed. Airlie Sturrock taught only at
the Recreation Centre and never at the studio. The Centre
advertised the class and collected the fees. Gregory Filler and
Craig Hempsted were dancers working outside of Canada on
cruise ships, hotels, movies, videos and in musical productions
on stage. Filler - during a break from other activities
- taught a class during two weeks in July, 1997 for which
he was paid the sum of $1,881.82. Hempsted taught an advanced
class in November and December, 1997 and earned a total of
$1,376.98. Breiland testified that in each instance she had come
to an agreement with Filler and/or Hempsted on a suitable fee and
she then proceeded to organize a workshop or - in one
instance - merely stepped aside and allowed Hempsted
- her former student - to teach the students in the
advanced dance class. It is difficult to see how Hempsted would
be integrated into the business of Stages under these
circumstances any more than a guest conductor of an orchestra or
a visiting professor or journalist becomes an employee of the
resident symphony or university when conducting an evening of
music or delivering a speech for a fixed fee. The speakers on the
international circuit would be surprised to learn that,
notwithstanding their former status of Prime Minister or
President, the delivery of a speech - even at a school
devoted to teaching the art of public speaking - would
transform them - albeit briefly - into employees of
the person or entity paying the fee. Again, very few of the
assumptions of fact assist the Minister because the special
projects created with the input of Filler and/or Hempsted were
sometimes separate from the normal operation of the school and
were organized quickly to take advantage of their presence in the
Victoria area. Filler and Hempsted were passing on their
knowledge only to advanced students and were often not involved
in teaching classes which were part of the majority of the
regular curriculum or schedule of Stages. Kendra Walker taught
dance at the Royal Winnipeg Ballet but attended at Victoria for
the purpose of teaching a summer school class - in July 1997 -
organized by Stages. It is easier to regard her as being an
integral component of Stages business operation since she
performed no other services except teaching the classes in
accordance with her knowledge of a particular style of dance.
Moreover, the summer school was created and wholly administered
by Stages and the activity was well within its usual course of
business. Donna Williams taught vocal portions of song and dance
at the Stages' studio and also worked the summer school
program with Walker. As such, she was a person more fully
absorbed into the mainstream business activities of Stages which
included the structured, intense summer school session organized
under circumstances making it apparent it was the business
activity of Stages and not Walker and/or Williams who worked
there as a pianist to accompany the dancers. The fact Williams
had other income from different schools is not significant,
per se, as many people - especially in the last 10
years - hold several part-time jobs or a combination of
full-time and part-time employment. The relevant factor to be
considered is whether - in providing her services to Stages - she
did so within the context of a business being carried out on her
own account. There is nothing in the evidence capable of
supporting that proposition. Walker - a teacher at the
Royal Winnipeg Ballet - although given a free hand in many
respects, was still assisting in the delivery of a product
- the summer school - that was the creation of
Breiland and the Stages infrastructure. A perusal of the brochure
- Exhibit A-7 - pertaining to Stages Third Annual
Summer Ballet Intensive - August 23-September 3, 1999
- makes it clear the event was carried out as an integral
part of the overall business structure of Stages. The parental
medical authorization was granted to Stages in the event a child
needed immediate medical attention. Registration and payment was
made to Stages and the schedule was subject to the final approval
of Breiland.
[38] The
persons who entered into written contracts with Stages were as
follows:
Donna Ball-Watson - September 31 [sic] 1998
- Exhibit A-3
Christie (Wilson) Hamar - 05/09/98 - Exhibit
A-4
Kirsten Odermatt - October 6, 1998 - Exhibit
A-5
David MacPherson - September 22, 1998 - Exhibit
A-6
[39] In the
case of Minister of National Revenue v. Emily Standing,
147 N.R. 238, Stone, J.A. at pages 239-240 stated:
"...There is no foundation in the case law for the
proposition that such a relationship may exist merely because the
parties choose to describe it to be so regardless of the
surrounding circumstances when weighed in the light of the
Wiebe Door test ..."
[40] In any
event, the contracts for some of the above persons were probably
not in effect during 1997 or most of 1998, although there was
evidence that Ball-Watson had signed a similar contract
- in September of each year - since 1992. It is
interesting to note that the language of the contracts reserves
unto Stages a significant degree of control over matters which
impinge directly upon the efficient operation of the school. In
cases of this sort, one observes that it is a high wire-balancing
act for payors who want to have the recipients of their cheques
seen as independent contractors for certain purposes yet manifest
a strong desire to superimpose certain conditions on the working
relationship which would fit more comfortably into the mold of an
employer/employee relationship. In the within appeals, the
parties usually conducted themselves in accordance with the terms
of the contract, although Breiland tended to operate the school
through consensus, treating her fellow teachers with respect. The
contracts are worth considering but in the overall process
- taking into account the periods covered by the
assessments - they are not particularly helpful in coming
to a conclusion on the status of the affected workers.
[41] Counsel
for Stages conceded Ball-Watson was an employee of Stages during
the relevant period covered by the assessments and during the
period from January 1, 1999 to January 7, 2000. It seems to
me there is very little difference between the working
circumstances pertaining to Ball-Watson and those applicable to
her predecessor, Bebe Eversfield. Ball-Watson assumed the role of
Eversfield which was to be the person in charge of the ballet
program offered to students at the school. Eversfield had
operated her own dance school and came to see Breiland once her
lease had expired. The evidence does not support a finding that
- thereafter - Eversfield was functioning in any form
of joint venture or partnership with Stages. Instead, her conduct
was consistent with that of an employee and the evidence -
including the assumptions of fact relied upon by the Minister -
place her into the mainstream of the delivery of instruction at
the studio on a regular basis, fully integrated into the teaching
schedule during the school year. The accommodation -
wherever possible - of a venerable and aging teacher within
a schedule is not - without more - an indicia of
entrepreneurship.
[42] In the
case of Charbonneau v. Canada(Minister of National Revenue -
M.N.R) [1996] F.C.J. No. 1337, the Federal Court of Appeal
dealt with the issue whether or not a log skidder was an employee
or independent contractor. The judgment of the Court was
delivered by Décary, J.A. who stated at page 1:
"Contract of employment or contract of enterprise? This,
once again, is the question that arises in this case, the issue
in which is whether the respondent, the owner and operator of a
skidder, was engaged in insurable employment for the purposes of
the application of paragraph 3(1)(a) of the Unemployment
Insurance Act.
Two preliminary observations must be made.
The tests laid down by this Court in Wiebe Door Services Ltd. v.
M.N.R. - on the one hand, the degree of control, the ownership of
the tools of work, the chance of profit and risk of loss, and on
the other, integration - are not the ingredients of a magic
formula. They are guidelines which it will generally be useful to
consider, but not to the point of jeopardizing the ultimate
objective of the exercise, which is to determine the overall
relationship between the parties. The issue is always, once it
has been determined that there is a genuine contract, whether
there is a relationship of subordination between the parties such
that there is a contract of employment (art. 2085 of the Civil
Code of Québec) or, whether there is not, rather, such a
degree of autonomy that there is a contract of enterprise or for
services (art. 2098 of the Code). In other words, we must not pay
so much attention to the trees that we lose sight of the forest
- a particularly apt image in this case. The parts must
give way to the whole.
Moreover, while the determination of the legal nature of the
contractual relationship will turn on the facts of each case,
nonetheless in cases that are substantially the same on the facts
the corresponding judgments should be substantially the same in
law. As well, when this Court has already ruled as to the nature
of a certain type of contract, there is no need thereafter to
repeat the exercise in its entirety: unless there are genuinely
significant differences in the facts, the Minister and the Tax
Court of Canada should not disregard the solution adopted by this
Court.
[43] I heard
the case of Gastown Actor's Studio Ltd. v. Canada
(Minister of National Revenue - M.N.R.) [2000] T.C.J.
No. 126. The appeals in that instance involved certain actors who
also worked as teachers at the Gastown studio while generating
income as working actors. On the matter of integration - at
p. 8 - I commented, as follows:
" This is probably the most difficult test to apply.
Certainly, without teachers - as a group - Gastown cannot offer
courses of instruction in accordance with the curriculum
advertised to interested parties. From the standpoint of the
individual workers, the method employed by Gastown to permit the
instructors to locate and pay other qualified persons - without
the knowledge or input of Gastown management - created a constant
source of instruction which could be delivered to the students by
means of the co-operative organism with its interchangeable
components. While the instructors could carry out private
instruction - often on Gastown premises - and be paid for their
efforts, when they were teaching students enrolled in the
actor's studio, it is difficult to see them as carrying on
business on their own account when the establishment in which
they worked was the creation of Gastown and functioned as a
recognized post-secondary educational institution in accordance
with provincial legislation. It was a school of instruction
recognized by various levels of government and was permitted to
issue a Certificate upon successful completion of a course of
full-time study. The students were eligible to obtain student
loans through the appropriate mechanism. Without Gastown and its
premises, the instructors could have generated revenue from
private teaching and coaching and from acting or in the course of
providing other services to the film and television industry. The
arrangement between Gastown and the instructors was mutually
beneficial and Counsel for Gastown urged me to find that it was
in the nature of a joint venture. However, Gastown had the
administrative infrastructure, established the curriculum, owned
the premises, and had carried out an advertising program which
led to students being enrolled in their institution. All
administrative aspects relating to setting of tuition, collection
of fees and issuing appropriate refunds in accordance with
government regulations were carried out by Gastown. Once the
students had been assembled ready to study in a variety of
different classes, the missing component of instructional
capability was then provided by the group of instructors as it
existed from time to time. In the case of Widdows, o/a Golden
Ears Entertainment and M.N.R., unreported, - 98-486(UI) - I
was dealing with an appeal involving a music school - combined
with a retail store - and the appellant there had regarded his
music teachers as independent contractors. At p. 8 - paragraph 14
- of the judgment I commented:
"In terms of integration, there is no doubt the business
being carried on was the business of the appellant operating as a
sole proprietor. When a student or a parent of a child wanted
music lessons, all arrangements to that end were made with the
appellant or his school administrator. The hostility surrounding
the termination of the working relationship of the appellant and
the worker which had endured for more than 7 years was due
largely to the apprehension of the worker that the appellant was
attempting to take with her certain students as though they were
her students and not individuals who were bound by contract to
his business operating as Golden Ears Music School. The teaching
of lessons was carried out within the same premises as the retail
store and the selling of instruments and music supplies
constituted the overall business of the appellant and he
integrated these revenue-producing components into the total
structure. It would be completely illogical to regard the
teaching of a student by the worker under the circumstances
revealed by the evidence as the furtherance of Ferrari's own
business in a school bearing the name of the appellant's sole
proprietorship in premises leased by him in a commercial centre
when all financial aspects of the teacher-student relationship
were conducted directly with the appellant. There was a lot more
to the music instruction business than what transpired in a
studio during a half-hour session although it is clear the
instruction was an integral part of the revenue-producing
component of the business which relied on charging fees to
students. The school administrator was not engaged to merely
co-ordinate activities of a dozen independent contractors
who were retained to provide music lessons each within the
context of a separately owned business. Again, one must look at
the overall nature of the business organization operated by the
appellant and the interplay between that operation and the
services provided by the worker."
[44] In my
opinion, a significant difference between the situation in
Gastown and in the within appeals is the requirement for
Gastown Studio to have obtained accreditation through a mechanism
established by provincial legislation so that it was the only
entity that could permit production of revenue in that venue,
utilizing that business infrastructure. In the instant case,
teachers were instructing at other venues in a cooperative form
of joint project or on their own account without any need to have
authorization flow to them from Stages. In the Gastown
case, all the teachers committed to a particular block of time
during which they agreed to teach a specific subject as
advertised in the curriculum.
[45] The use
of a generic set of assumptions is not helpful. The Minister
should do what I was forced to do and that is to examine all of
the circumstances of the various workers and - at least
- attempt to place them into categories where the
similarities are substantial. I appreciate the process utilized
by the Minister is far from adequate in terms of obtaining a full
picture of the situation in comparison to the ability of a judge
to comprehend the nuances of a working relationship after hearing
evidence and examining documents during a two-day appeal hearing
but there is still the opportunity for the Minister to do better
when faced with a mixed bag such as in the within appeals. A
payroll audit, per se, will only reveal recipients of
payments by the business entity, as recorded in the books and
records under various categories. One cannot merely include a
person into an assessment on that basis alone.
[46] In the
case of Tracey L. Johnson v. Her Majesty the Queen,
unreported, 1999-4986(IT)I, - at p. 6 - Bowman, A.C.J.
T.C.C. stated:
"Moreover, pleaded assumptions which demonstrate, as they
often do, that the Minister has recklessly and mindlessly pleaded
"assumptions" that bear no relation to the facts form
no basis on which to defend an assessment. This court will accord
to boilerplate the respect and attention that it
deserves."
[47] It is
interesting to reflect on the working circumstances of those
individuals conceded by counsel for the respondent as appropriate
persons to be excluded from the application of the assessments
issued by the Minister for 1997 and 1998. The only overarching
distinction between that group and certain remaining persons
seems to me to be rooted in the amount of money earned. The fact
that Tim Crofton earned the grand sum of $160.00 - during
1997 - while others such as Becker, Rand, Wodja and Dick earned
$72.00, $255.00, $37.50 and $300.00, respectively cannot be
determinative of their status merely because they earned less
than Filler, Hempsted, Hamar, Odermatt and others who seemed to
have provided their services under similar circumstances.
[48] In the
within appeals, the complexity of the circumstances and the
variations in the working relationships causes one to appreciate
the admonition issued by the Court in Wiebe, supra,
to regard the tests as a four-in-one. This is not an easy matter
to decide and to the reader the distinctions may be slight in
terms of the reasons stated as the basis for finding that certain
workers should be excluded from the assessments while others
apparently performing - more or less - a similar
service remain within their ambit. Any student of this particular
field of jurisprudence will soon become aware that - on occasion
- small differences can accumulate, leading to a fuller sense of
a working relationship which may then result in a declaration as
to the status of a particular service provider which is opposite
to the one assigned to a fellow worker.
[49] Taking
into account the findings of fact, having examined the evidence
and applying the results of that process to the relevant
jurisprudence, I am now prepared to decide this case.
[50] In my
view, in addition to Donna Ball-Watson, the following persons
were employees of Stages during 1997:
Bebe Eversfield
Donna Williams
Kendra Walker
[51] With
regard to the assessment for 1998, in addition to Donna
Ball-Watson, I find the following persons to have been employees
of Stages:
Donna Williams
Kendra Walker
[52] The
decision of the Minister - dated September 14, 2000 - found
Donna Ball-Watson to have been an employee of Stages,
engaged in both insurable and pensionable employment under a
contract of service, for the period January 1, 1999 to January 7,
2000. The evidence confirms this decision was correctly made and
counsel for Stages conceded the point. Further, appeals
2000-4255(EI) and 2000-4256(CPP) - by Stages - are hereby
dismissed as is appeal 2000-4327(EI) filed by Donna
Williams. It follows that the appeal - 2000-4257(CPP)
by Stages and appeal - 2000-4328(CPP) by Williams - will also be
dismissed.
[53] The
appeal of Christie (Wilson) Hamar - 2000-4593(EI) -
is allowed and the decision of the Minister - dated September 27,
2000 - confirming the assessments issued to Stages for 1997 and
1998 insofar as it pertained to her - is hereby varied to
find:
Christie (Wilson) Hamar was not an employee performing
services under a contract of service with Stages Performing Arts
School Ltd. during 1997 and 1998.
[54] The
appeal of Kirsten Odermatt - 2000-4572(EI) is allowed and
the decision of the Minister dated September 27, 2000 -
confirming the assessments issued to Stages for 1997 and 1998
insofar as it pertained to her - is hereby varied to
find:
Kirsten Odermatt was not an employee performing services under
a contract of service with Stages Performing Arts School Ltd.,
during 1997 and 1998.
[55] The
appeal - 2000-4258(EI) by Stages is allowed and the
decision of the Minister - dated September 27, 2000 -
confirming assessments issued to Stages for 1997 and 1998 is
hereby varied to find:
1997: The following persons were not employees performing
services under a contract of service with Stages and therefore
must be deleted from the assessment issued to Stages Performing
Arts School Ltd.
Lia Biros
Kirstie Paterson
David Kitt-MacPherson
Tim Crofton
Paul Becker
Kirsten Odermatt
Krista Rand
Airlie Sturrock
Morgan Saddington
Jodi Sing
Sandy Irving
Magda Wodja
Dana Dyck
Christie (Wilson) Hamar
Gregory Filler
Craig Hempsted
[56] Usually,
I would not list the persons in relation to whom the assessment
was confirmed but in this instance it is probably appropriate in
view of the number of people involved and the surprising
similarity in names. The 1997 assessment of the Minister -
as confirmed with respect to the following persons by the
decision dated September 27, 2000 - will continue to apply
to the following individuals:
Donna Ball-Watson
Bebe Eversfield
Donna Williams
Kendra Walker
1998: The following persons were not employees performing
services under a contract of service with Stages and therefore
must be deleted from the assessment issued to Stages Performing
Arts School Ltd.:
Lia Biros
David Kitt-MacPherson
Kirsten Odermatt
Renee (Jodi) Sing
Cheryl Jameson
Magda Wodja
Angela Mousseau
Duncan Stewart
Christie Wilson
Karlie Wilson
[57] Again,
following the procedure referred to above, the 1998 assessment
- as it was confirmed by the Minister with respect to the
following persons - will continue to apply to the following
individuals:
Donna Ball-Watson
Donna Williams
Kendra Walker
[58] As agreed
at the outset by both counsel, the various appeals filed pursuant
to the Canada Pension Plan will be governed by these
reasons and the dispositions contained therein and - where
an appeal was allowed - the Minister will vary the relevant
decision, issued pursuant to the Plan, in order to conform
with this judgment.
Signed at Sidney, British Columbia, this 4th day of June
2001.
"D.W. Rowe"
D.J.T.C.C.
COURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4255(EI)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Stages Performing Arts School Ltd. and
M.N.R.
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4256(CPP)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Stages Performing Arts School Ltd. and
M.N.R.
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4257(CPP)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Stages Performing Arts School Ltd. and
M.N.R. and Evangelia (a.k.a.) Lia Biros
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
Counsel for the
Intervenor:
George Jones
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, B.C.
For the Intervenor:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4258(EI)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Stages Performing Arts School Ltd. and
M.N.R. and Evangelia (a.k.a.) Lia Biros
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
Counsel for the
Intervenor:
George Jones
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, B.C.
For the Intervenor:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4327(EI)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Donna Williams and M.N.R.
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4328(CPP)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Donna Williams and M.N.R.
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4572(EI)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Kirsten J. Odermatt and M.N.R.
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4573(CPP)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Kirsten J. Odermatt and M.N.R.
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4593(EI)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Christie D. Hamar and M.N.R.
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE
NO.:
2000-4594(CPP)
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Christie D. Hamar and M.N.R.
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Victoria, British Columbia
DATE OF
HEARING:
March 13 and 14, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
June 4, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
George Jones
Firm:
Jones Emery et al.
Victoria, British Columbia
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Canada
2000-4255(EI)
BETWEEN:
STAGES PERFORMING ARTS SCHOOL LTD.,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent.
Appeal heard on common evidence with the
appeals of Stages Performing Arts School Ltd.
(2000-4256(CPP), 2000-4257(CPP)) and 2000-4258(EI)),
Donna Williams (2000-4327(EI) and
2000-4328(CPP)), Kirsten J. Odermatt (2000-4572(EI)
and 2000-4573(CPP)) and Christie D. Hamar (2000-4593(EI)
and 2000-4594(CPP)) on March 13 and 14, 2001 at Victoria, British
Columbia, by
the Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
Appearances
Counsel for the
Appellant:
George Jones
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Victor Caux
JUDGMENT
The
appeal is dismissed and the decision of the Minister is confirmed
in accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Sidney, British Columbia, this 4th day of June
2001.
D.J.T.C.C.