Date: 20060505
Docket: A-296-04
Citation: 2006 FCA
166
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU
J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAYMOND
BÉRUBÉ
Appellant
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Hearing held at Montréal,
Quebec, on May 4, 2006.
Judgment delivered at Montréal, Quebec, on May 5, 2006.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: LÉTOURNEAU
J.A.
CONCURRED
IN BY: DÉCARY
J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
Date: 20060505
Docket: A-296-04
Citation: 2006 FCA 166
CORAM: DÉCARY
J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU
J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAYMOND BÉRUBÉ
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
[1]
The
appellant was the subject of an assessment of unreported income by the net
worth method. He filed his objection in the Tax Court of Canada, where some of
his claims were accepted. He is now appealing the decision of the Tax Court of
Canada as to the claims that were rejected, in particular regarding clothing,
transportation and the amount of cash which he said he had as petty cash.
[2]
To begin
with, the appellant alleged that the judge made an error in not accepting his
arguments on these points. The question is essentially one of credibility
which, though it is not entirely outside the Court’s jurisdiction, still
remains for obvious reasons, the province of the judge who had the advantage of
seeing and hearing the witnesses. Nothing that was submitted to this Court on
this point warrants its intervention in the circumstances.
[3]
The
appellant also alleged that the judge disregarded the rules of natural justice
and procedural fairness by refusing to allow him to proceed with his testimony
and to recall the auditor to cross-examine her again. The transcript of the
testimony and arguments does not support such an objection.
[4]
At no time
did the appellant ask the trial judge for leave to reopen the inquiry in order
to conduct a second cross-examination of the witness. Accordingly, the judge
cannot be blamed for refusing to grant an unstated wish by the appellant of
which he could not be aware.
[5]
Actually,
the transcript showed that the appellant, who represented himself, suffered
from some confusion between the quite different stages of argument and filing
of evidence, stages which should not be confused precisely for reasons of
procedural fairness. As this Court stated in Wagg v. R., 2003 FCA 303, a
lack of experience or training in representing oneself in a judicial proceeding
entails risks. However, those risks are assumed by the litigant, and thus the
unfortunate consequences that may follow, for which the trial judge cannot be blamed.
“Gilles
Létourneau”
I
concur.
Robert Décary J.A.
I
concur.
J.D. Denis Pelletier J.A.
Certified
true translation
François
Brunet, LLB, BCL
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-296-04
APPEAL FROM
JUDGMENT OF JUDGE BRENT PARIS OF THE TAX COURT OF CANADA ON MAY 7, 2004, CASE
No. 2000‑1812(IT)G.
STYLE OF CAUSE: RAYMOND
BÉRUBÉ v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: May 4, 2006
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: Létourneau J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: Décary J.A.
Pelletier J.A.
DATED: May 5, 2006
APPEARANCES:
|
Raymond Bérubé
Montréal, Quebec
|
FOR THE
APPELLANT
(himself)
|
|
Martin
Gentile
|
FOR THE
RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITOR
OF RECORD:
|
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE
RESPONDENT
|
Date: 20060505
Docket: A-296-04
Montréal,
Quebec, May 5, 2006
CORAM: DÉCARY
J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU
J.A.
PELLETIER
J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAYMOND BÉRUBÉ
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
JUDGMENT
The appeal is dismissed with
costs.
“Robert Décary”
Certified
true translation
François
Brunet, LLB, BCL
Email this Content