Date:
20051024
Docket: A-542-03
Citation:
2005 FCA 340
CORAM : DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU
J.A.
NOËL
J.A.
BETWEEN:
LENCY
TURNER
Appellant
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Hearing
held at Québec, Quebec, on October 20, 2005.
Judgement delivered at Ottawa,
Ontario, on October 24, 2005.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL
J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: DÉCARY
J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
Date:
20051024
Docket:
A-542-03
Citation:
2005 FCA 340
CORAM : DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU
J.A.
NOËL
J.A.
BETWEEN:
LENCY
TURNER
Appellant
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT
NOËL J.A.:
[1]
This is an appeal against a decision of Angers J. of the Tax Court of
Canada dated October 16, 2003 confirming the assessments issued concerning the
appellant’s taxation years 1994 to 1997, adding unreported income totalling
$45,935 with penalties for each of the years.
[2]
In issuing the assessments, the Minister of National Revenue assumed
that deposits in the order of $33,000, $5,000, $4,000 and $3,000 made by the
appellant during the years in question were derived from major fraud
perpetrated by her then spouse against Revenue Canada and with respect to which
he was charged and convicted. The Minister also assessed in the hands of the
appellant the interest generated on the deposits.
[3]
The amounts in question were deposited by the appellant with a
well-known brokerage firm into an account opened in her name. All the deposits
were made in cash, in denominations of $20, $100 and $1,000. The first deposit
was in the amount of $31,000.
[4]
The appellant tried to convince the trial judge that the deposits were
not the result of fraud, but came from her mother. She also explained that the
interest income produced by the deposits was not reported because the brokerage
firm in which the amounts had been invested had neglected to issue annual
statements.
[5]
The trial judge called these explanations implausible. His
analysis showed that the appellant’s mother lived on welfare benefits and was
incapable of providing the appellant with the amounts in question.
Furthermore, the judge dismissed the appellant’s testimony to the effect that
her mother had received $15,000 to $20,000 during the 1970s as compensation for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident. A
Provincial Court judgment introduced in evidence by the respondent indicated
that, while the appellant’s mother had been awarded damages in 1977, they were
in the order of $1,035.15 and represented the cost of repairs to her car.
[6]
When confronted with this evidence, the appellant argued, both before
the trial judge and before us, that the $15,000 to $20,000 in damages were
derived from a separate event that occurred [TRANSLATION] “in the years 1977 to 1980, or
thereabouts” (Appellant’s Memorandum, paragraph 26). However, no evidence was
introduced concerning the event and no details were provided. In fact, we
still know nothing about the circumstances surrounding the bodily injury
sustained or the amount of $15,000 to $20,000 paid to her mother.
[7]
While the appellant’s mother would probably have been able to
clear up the story, the appellant chose not to call her as a witness. She
explained that, on account of her mother’s health, she didn’t
want to expose her to cross-examination. Here, again, no details were provided.
The trial judge indicated in his judgment that the appellant’s mother’s health
“would seem to [be] the reason for her absence” (Reasons, paragraph 29).
[8]
Given that the appellant’s case is based entirely on acts and
events that she attributes to her mother, it is surprising, as the trial judge
himself noted, that the appellant’s mother was not called to
testify.
[9]
The appellant reiterated before this Court her version of the facts,
adding that Angers J. should have believed her. It was up to Angers J. to draw
a conclusion as to her credibility, and nothing that the appellant has told us
during this hearing gives me reason to question his judgment.
[10]
I would dismiss the appeal with costs.
“Marc Noël”
J.A.
“I concur.
Robert Décary J.A.”
“I concur.
Gilles Létourneau J.A.”
Certified true translation
Michael Palles
FEDERAL
COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-542-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: Lency
Turner v. Her Majesty the Queen
PLACE OF HEARING: Québec,
Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: October
20, 2005
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: Noël J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: Décary J.A.
Létourneau J.A.
DATED: October
24, 2005
APPEARANCES:
Lency Turner
|
FOR HERSELF
|
Martin
Gentile
|
FOR THE
RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Lency Turner
Chicoutimi,
Quebec
|
FOR HERSELF
|
John H. Sims
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa,
Ontario
|
FOR THE
RESPONDENT
|