Strayer
J.A.:
After
considering
the
very
thorough
argument
advanced
by
the
appellant
we
are
not
persuaded
that
the
learned
Tax
Court
Judge
made
any
reviewable
error
in
his
determination
that
the
respondent’s
debts
were
not
settled
or
extinguished
by
the
arrangement
made
in
1986.
The
trial
judge
found
against
Her
Majesty
on
the
three
issues
advanced
by
the
Crown.
With
respect
to
the
first
issue
as
to
whether
the
debts
of
the
respondent
(CDL)
had
been
extinguished
in
substance
if
not
in
form,
the
trial
judge
found
as
a
fact
that
the
debts
were
not
extinguished
as
there
was
no
forgiveness
of
them.
Instead
CDL
remained
indebted,
but
to
Carma
Limited
instead
of
to
its
original
creditors.
We
believe
there
was
evidence
upon
which
he
could
so
find
and
it
is
not
possible
to
say
that
his
decision
was
the
result
of
a
palpable
and
overriding
error.
With
respect
to
the
second
issue
of
novation,
and
the
third
issue
of
settlement,
the
trial
judge
found
from
his
examination
of
the
documents
that
in
law
there
was
no
novation
or
settlement
but
instead
an
assignment
of
the
remaining
unsatisfied
debts
by
CDL’s
creditors
to
Carma
Limited.
The
latter
remained
legally
entitled
to
enforce
those
debts.
Again
we
believe
that
the
documents
support
this
legal
conclusion
and
that
there
was
no
sufficient
reason
to
ignore
the
formal
legal
structure
in
which
CDL,
its
creditors,
and
Carma
Limited
cast
their
arrangements.
The
appeal
must
therefore
be
dismissed
with
costs.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content