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