Date: 20070104
Docket: A-179-06
A-180-06
Citation: 2007 FCA 4
Present: NADON J.A.
SHARLOW
J.A.
PELLETIER
J.A.
BETWEEN:
BALINT
VASARHELYI
Appellant
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Dealt with in writing without appearance
of parties.
Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario,
on January 4, 2007.
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT BY: SHARLOW
J.A.
Date: 20070104
Docket: A-179-06
A-180-06
Citation: 2007 FCA 4
Present: NADON
J.A.
SHARLOW
J.A.
PELLETIER
J.A.
BETWEEN:
BALINT VASARHELYI
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
SHARLOW J.A.
[1]
The appellant
is appealing two decisions of the Tax Court of Canada, one relating to an
income tax assessment, the other to an assessment of goods and services tax (Vasarhelyi
v. Canada, 2006 TCC 282). When the parties were unable to agree on the
contents of the appeal books, the contents were settled by the Order of Noël
J.A. dated August 14, 2006. That Order limited the appeal books to the 9 items
proposed by the respondent, and specifically required the exclusion of certain
documents that constituted “new evidence” that was not before the Tax Court at
trial.
[2]
The 9
items that the respondent proposed for the appeal books were as follows:
|
|
A-179-06
|
A-180-06
|
|
1.
|
Table
of contents
|
Table
of contents
|
|
2.
|
Notice
of appeal filed at the Federal Court of Appeal
|
Notice
of appeal filed at the Federal Court of Appeal
|
|
3.
|
Notice
of Appeal filed at the Tax Court of Canada, Appeal No. 2005-3516(IT)I
|
Notice
of Appeal filed at the Tax Court of Canada, Appeal No. 2005-3516(GST)I
|
|
4.
|
Reply
filed at Tax Court
|
Reply
filed at Tax Court
|
|
5.
|
Judgment
of Mr. Justice Archambault in respect of the Tax Court IT Appeal
|
Judgment
of Mr. Justice Archambault in respect of the Tax Court GST Appeal
|
|
6.
|
Certified
Transcript of the Reasons for Judgment of Mr. Justice Archambault in the Tax
Court IT Appeal
|
Certified
Transcript of the Reasons for Judgment of Mr. Justice Archambault in the Tax
Court GST Appeal
|
|
7.
|
Complete
Certified Transcript of the Tax Court IT Appeal
|
Complete
Certified Transcript of the Tax Court GST Appeal
|
|
8.
|
Copies
of all exhibits filed at the trial of the Tax Court IT Appeal
|
Copies
of all exhibits filed at the trial of the Tax Court GST Appeal
|
|
9.
|
Agreement
regarding contents of Appeal Book
|
Agreement
regarding contents of Appeal Book
|
[3]
This reflects
the standard list of contents for an appeal book, although in this case, as
there was no agreement, item 9 would automatically be replaced with the Order
settling the contents.
[4]
The
appellant failed to comply with the Order of Noël J.A. He apparently asked for
the matter to be reconsidered, which led to the following Order of Létourneau
J.A. dated November 15, 2006:
|
The
appellant is given until November 29, 2006 to file, in accordance with Noël
J.A.’s Order dated August 14, 2006, and serve the Appeal Books on the
respondent.
Failure
to do so in conformity with Noël J.A.’s Order or within the time-limit
prescribed by the present Order will result in the dismissal of the appeal
without further notice.
|
[5]
The
appellant has now served and filed appeal books, but the respondent argues that
in a number of respects the appeal books do not conform to the Order of Noël
J.A. The respondent requests that the Court consider dismissing the appeals as
indicated in the Order of Létourneau J.A. The appellant has submitted a letter
of explanation opposing the respondent’s position.
[6]
My
examination of the appeal books discloses that the appeal books do not conform
to the Order of Noël J.A. There are a number of deficiencies, but the most
important one is that the appeal books both contain the “new evidence” that Noël
J.A. specifically required to be excluded. The appellant’s letter does not
provide a reasonable explanation.
[7]
The
appellant is self represented, and it may be that he is not familiar with the
rules. However, he has been given significant guidance in the steps required to
file a proper appeal book, which he has chosen to disregard. I would dismiss
both appeals with costs.
“K.
Sharlow”
“I
agree
M.
Nadon J.A.”
“I
agree
J.D.
Denis Pelletier J.A.”
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-179-06
A-180-06
STYLE OF CAUSE: BALINT
VASARHELYI
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT
APPEARANCE OF PARTIES
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: SHARLOW J.A.
DATED: January 4, 2007
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:
|
Balint Vasarhelyi
|
ON HIS OWN BEHALF
|
|
John
Gibb-Carsley
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
|
Balint Vasarhelyi
North Vancouver,
B.C.
John H. Sims Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|
ON HIS OWN BEHALF
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
|
|
|
Email this Content