Date: 20110525
Docket: A-300-10
Citation: 2011 FCA 181
CORAM: SHARLOW
J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
STRATAS
J.A.
BETWEEN:
OREST RUSNAK
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
IN RIGHT OF THE MINISTER OF
NATIONAL REVENUE FOR CANADA
and CANADA REVENUE AGENCY
Respondents
Heard at Edmonton, Alberta, on May 25, 2011.
Judgment delivered from the
Bench at Edmonton,
Alberta, on May 25, 2011.
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW
J.A.
Date: 20110525
Docket: A-300-10
Citation: 2011 FCA 181
CORAM: SHARLOW
J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
STRATAS
J.A.
BETWEEN:
OREST RUSNAK
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
IN RIGHT OF THE MINISTER OF
NATIONAL REVENUE FOR CANADA
and CANADA REVENUE AGENCY
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE
COURT
(Delivered
from the Bench at Edmonton, Alberta, on
May 25, 2011)
SHARLOW J.A.
[1]
Mr.
Orest Rusnak is appealing the order of Justice Hansen of the Federal Court
granting the Crown’s motion to quash his application for judicial review. The
application was a challenge to the decisions of the Minister of National
Revenue to confirm certain income tax assessments. Mr. Rusnak sought an order
quashing the confirmation decisions and setting aside the assessments on the
basis that he was not afforded a formal hearing or procedural fairness at the
objection stage. He also sought a declaration that in the objection process he
did not receive a formal hearing as mandated by the Canadian Bill of Rights,
and that the Minister did not observe the principles of natural justice and
procedural fairness required by law. Despite the able submissions of counsel
for Mr. Rusnak, we have concluded that this appeal must be dismissed, for the
following reasons.
[2]
By
virtue of the combined operation of section 18.5 of the Federal Courts Act,
R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, and subsection 12(1) of the Tax Court of Canada Act,
R.S.C. 1985, c. T-2, the Federal Court does not have the jurisdiction to
entertain an application for judicial review that in substance is a collateral
attack on an income tax assessment that may be the subject of an appeal to the
Tax Court of Canada: Roitman v. Canada, 2006 FCA 266, at paragraph 20.
Specifically, the Federal Court has no jurisdiction to set aside an income tax
assessment on the basis of procedural flaws at the objection stage: Webster
v. Canada, 2003 FCA 388, at paragraph 20.
[3]
It
follows that the Federal Court has no jurisdiction to quash the confirmation
decisions in issue in this case, or to cancel the related assessments. Further,
the declarations sought by Mr. Rusnak, even if granted, would have no
substantive or practical effect. Therefore, Justice Hansen was justified in
finding that Mr. Rusnak’s application for judicial review is bereft of any
possibility of success, and in striking it.
[4]
The
appeal will be dismissed with costs.
"K.
Sharlow"
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-300-10
STYLE OF CAUSE: Orest
Rusnak v. Her Majesty The Queen et. al.
PLACE OF HEARING: Edmonton, Alberta
DATE OF HEARING: May 25, 2011
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Sharlow J.A.
OF THE COURT BY: Pelletier J.A.
Stratas J.A.
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Sharlow J.A.
APPEARANCES:
Patrick J. McAllister
|
FOR
THE APPELLANT
|
Gregory Perlinski
|
FOR
THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
Cleall Barristers and Solicitors
Edmonton, Alberta
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
|
Myles J. Kirvan
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|