Walsh,
J.:—Applicant
has
moved
in
a
motion
presentable
in
this
Court
on
May
26,
1986
pursuant
to
subsection
225.2(2)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
for
the
fixing
of
a
date
for
determination
of
the
question
of
whether
a
certain
direction
made
by
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
pursuant
to
subsection
225.2(1)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
was
justified
in
the
circumstances.
This
is
the
section
permitting
the
Minister,
when
it
is
reasonably
considered
that
collection
of
the
amount
assessed
in
respect
of
a
taxpayer
to
be
jeopardized
by
delay
in
the
collection
thereof,
by
registered
letter
to
advise
the
taxpayer
to
pay
forthwith
the
amount
assessed
or
any
part
thereof.
Subsection
5
requires
the
Minister
on
the
hearing
of
an
application
pursuant
to
subsection
225.2(2)
to
justify
the
direction
given,
imposing
the
burden
of
proof
of
this
on
him.
A
certificate
having
the
effect
of
judgment
was
registered
in
this
Court
on
April
17,
1986
against
F.P.I.
Development
Corporation
for
tax
liability
in
excess
of
$10
million,
pursuant
to
Part
VIII,
Scientific
Research
Tax
Credit,
of
the
Act.
On
May
13,
1986
a
similar
certificate
was
registered
against
Charles
Edward
Danielson,
husband
of
the
applicant
herein,
a
director
of
the
said
corporation.
In
his
affidavit
in
connection
with
her
application
he
states
that
he
had
his
wife
appointed
as
a
director
because
of
a
requirement
of
the
British
Columbia
Companies
Act
that
two
directors
be
resident
in
British
Columbia
but
that
at
no
time
did
she
have
any
active
role
in
the
company’s
affairs,
nor
any
knowledge
of
the
company’s
business
activities.
The
first
indication
she
had
that
she
was
also
going
to
be
assessed,
as
a
director,
for
the
said
tax
liability
was
on
May
14,
1986
by
a
letter
dated
May
13,1986
and
on
May
13
a
similar
certificate
having
the
same
force
and
effect
as
if
a
judgment
of
this
Court
had
been
registered
against
her,
File
No.
ITA-1439-
86.
On
May
15
three
bailiffs
presented
themselves
at
the
common
domicile
5359
Monte
Bre
Crescent,
West
Vancouver,
to
effect
a
seizure,
with
writs
of
fieri
facias
issued
against
both
Danielson
and
his
wife,
the
applicant
herein.
The
property
was
in
the
name
of
the
wife,
the
present
applicant
Bonnie
Ellen
Danielson,
and
they
were
refused
entry,
since,
according
to
the
affidavit
of
Charles
Edward
Danielson,
the
seizure
was
apparently
made
by
virtue
of
the
Writ
issued
against
him,
although
they
allegedly
had
the
other
writ
in
their
possession.
They
did
tow
away
a
station
wagon
belonging
to
him.
The
Court
was
informed
that
subsequently,
and
before
the
hearing
of
this
motion,
two
bank
accounts
of
applicant
in
the
Bank
of
Montreal
at
2410
Marine
Drive,
West
Vancouver,
and
the
Royal
Bank
of
Canada
on
Marine
Drive,
were
seized,
containing
$3,144.44
in
the
first
account
and
$347
in
the
Royal
Bank
account.
Patricia
Conner,
identified
as
Director
of
Collections
for
Revenue
Canada,
was
also
present
with
the
bailiffs
but
refused
to
disclose
the
grounds
on
which
action
was
taken
pursuant
to
subsection
225.2(1)
of
the
Act.
The
affidavit
of
Mr.
Danielson
relates
that
although
he
is
having
personal
financial
problems
relating
to
a
breach
of
trust
and
misappropriation
of
trust
funds
which
are
under
investigation
by
the
Law
Society
of
British
Columbia,
his
wife
is
no
way
implicated
in
them.
It
would
appear
that
when
the
collection
procedure
against
applicant,
pursuant
to
subsection
225.1(1)
of
the
Act,
comes
up
for
hearing,
pursuant
to
her
notice
of
objection
under
subsection
225.1(2),
she
may
have
a
good
arguable
case
to
have
this
set
aside.
Pursuant
to
subsection
227.1(1)
of
the
Act
where
a
corporation
has
failed
to
deduct
or
withhold
taxes
due,
inter
alia,
under
Part
VIII
of
the
Act,
the
directors
are
jointly
and
severally
liable
with
the
corporation
but
pursuant
to
subsection
227.1(3),
“‘a
director
is
not
liable
for
a
failure
under
subsection
(1)
where
he
exercises
a
degree
of
care,
diligence
and
skill
to
prevent
the
failure
that
a
reasonably
prudent
person
would
have
exercised
in
comparable
circumstances."
Certainly,
in
due
course
the
Minister
will
have
to
justify
the
assessing
of
the
present
applicant,
Bonnie
Ellen
Danielson,
as
a
director.
On
the
other
hand,
a
certificate
has
been
registered
against
her
which
justified
the
seizure
and
whether
this
certificate
was
validly
registered
or
not
is
not
a
matter
to
be
decided
on
the
present
motion
as
applicant’s
counsel
concedes.
The
circumstances,
as
disclosed
by
the
affidavit,
however,
would
seem
to
justify
the
issue
of
an
interim
injunction
to
remain
in
effect
until
May
26,
1986,
at
which
date
the
motion
for
setting
down
a
hearing
pursuant
to
subsection
225.2(2)
of
the
Act
will
be
heard.
The
presiding
judge
at
that
date
will
decide
whether
a
further
injunction
should
be
granted
to
remain
in
effect
until
the
determination
of
the
issues
raised
in
that
hearing
as
to
applicant's
liability
as
a
director
for
taxes
allegedly
due
by
the
corporation.
This
interim
injunction
should
only
be
granted,
however,
on
terms
with
which
applicant’s
counsel
has
indicated
she
is
prepared
to
comply.
The
following
order
will
therefore
be
made:
Order
Respondents
are
enjoined
until
May
26,
1986
from
taking
any
further
action
pursuant
to
the
Writ
of
Seizure
issued
in
this
Court
in
ITA-1439-86.
This
order
is
made
subject
to
and
on
the
express
undertaking
of
applicant
not
to
remove,
sell
or
otherwise
dispose
of
any
assets
not
yet
seized
including
the
contents
of
any
safety
deposit
boxes
in
her
name
or
in
the
joint
name
of
herself
and
her
husband,
Charles
Edward
Danielson
or
of
F.P.I.
Development
Corporation
into
which
she
may
have
access,
not
to
sell,
transfer
title
to
or
otherwise
dispose
of
any
furniture
or
furnishings
in
the
common
domicile
at
5359
Monte
Bre
Crescent,
West
Vancouver,
and
not
to
remove
from
the
bank
accounts
seized
in
the
Royal
Bank
of
Canada
at
Marine
Drive
and
Bank
of
Montreal,
Marine
Drive,
in
her
name,
the
moneys
therein,
save
such
as
are
reasonably
necessary
for
personal
living
expenses
between
this
date
and
May
26,
1986.
In
order
to
allow
applicant
to
use
such
bank
accounts
for
the
removal
of
such
reasonable
amounts,
the
seizures
of
them
are
lifted.
Costs
in
the
event.
Order
accordingly.
Email this Content