Wynter – Federal Court of Appeal defines “wilful blindness” as deliberate ignorance
In the context of a routine gross negligence case, Rennie JA stated:
[R]equiring an intention to cheat to establish wilful blindness [as contended by the taxpayer] is inconsistent with the well-established jurisprudence that wilful blindness pivots on a finding that the taxpayer deliberately chose not to make inquiries in order to avoid verifying that which might be such an inconvenient truth. The essential factual element is a finding of deliberate ignorance, as it “connotes ‘an actual process of suppressing a suspicion’”: Briscoe [2010 SCC 13]… .
Neal Armstrong. Summary of Wynter v. Canada, 2017 FCA 195 under s. 163(2).