Tardif
7.C.J.:
This
is
an
appeal
from
an
income
tax
assessment
in
respect
of
the
1993
taxation
year.
In
that
assessment,
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
disallowed
the
tax
credit
claimed
by
the
appellant
for
severe
and
prolonged
physical
impairment.
The
tax
credit
related
to
a
severe
physical
impairment
suffered
by
the
appellant,
Thérèse
Myrne
Forget-Blanchard.
The
appellant
testified
at
the
hearing
of
the
instant
appeal.
She
explained
that
she
had
difficulty
getting
around
and
that
she
was
unable
to
walk
for
long
periods
because,
after
a
certain
length
of
time,
she
would
fall
down.
She
explained
that
she
needed
the
assistance
of
her
daughter,
who
lives
in
the
unit
below
her,
to
perform
certain
tasks
including
the
preparation
of
meals
and
maintenance
and
housekeeping
in
her
unit.
She
said
that
she
used
a
walker
to
get
around
inside
her
unit.
She
also
testified
that
she
required
her
daughter’s
assistance
to
go
to
the
store
and
to
do
the
grocery
shopping.
At
the
hearing,
I
could
see
that
the
appellant
moved
with
difficulty
using
a
cane.
The
morning
of
the
hearing,
she
came
to
the
court
alone.
She
also
mentioned
that
she
lives
in
a
second-floor
unit
which
requires
her
to
go
up
and
down
several
stairs
whenever
she
goes
out.
She
stated
that
she
drives
her
car
when
her
daughter
is
with
her.
Her
testimony
was
fully
in
keeping
with
the
explanations
provided
in
support
of
her
claim
on
December
30,
1994.
I
have
no
doubt
that
Thérèse
Myrne
Forget-Blanchard
has
a
great
deal
of
difficulty
getting
around
and
that
her
physical
disability
causes
inconvenience
and
worry.
Moreover,
the
fact
that
she
has
been
declared
to
be
disabled
by
the
Commission
de
la
santé
et
de
la
sécurité
au
travail
attests
to
the
severity
of
the
permanent
partial
disability
the
appellant
suffers.
Nevertheless,
the
provisions
of
the
Act
are
quite
explicit
and
leave
little
room
for
interpretation.
In
1991,
Parliament
clarified
its
position
by
defining
the
meaning
of
the
expression
“basic
activities
of
daily
living”:
118.4(1)
For
the
purposes
of
subsection
6(16),
sections
118.2
and
118.3
and
thi#
subsection,
(a)
an
impairment
is
prolonged
where
it
has
lasted,
or
can
reasonably
be
expected
to
last,
for
a
continuous
period
of
at
least
12
months;
(b)
an
individual’s
ability
to
perform
a
basic
activity
of
daily
living
is
markedly
restricted
only
where
all
or
substantially
all
of
the
time,
even
with
therapy
and
the
use
of
appropriate
devices
and
medication,
the
individual
is
blind
or
is
unable
(or
requires
an
inordinate
amount
of
time)
to
perform
a
basic
activity
of
daily
living;
(c)
a
basic
activity
of
daily
living
in
relation
to
an
individual
means
(i)
perceiving,
thinking
and
remembering,
(ii)
feeding
and
dressing
oneself,
(iii)
speaking
so
as
to
be
understood,
in
a
quiet
setting,
by
another
person
familiar
with
the
individual,
(iv)
hearing
so
as
to
understand,
in
a
quiet
settling,
another
person
familiar
with
the
individual,
(v)
eliminating
(bowel
and
bladder
functions),
or
(vi)
walking;
and
(d)
for
greater
certainty,
no
other
activity,
including
working,
housekeeping
or
a
social
or
recreational
activity,
shall
be
considered
as
a
basic
activity
of
daily
living.
Additional
explanations
and
clarifications
appear
on
page
160
of
the
budget
document
dated
February
26,
1991
in
which
the
legislative
amendment
was
announced:
As
noted
above,
to
claim
the
disability
tax
credit,
a
person’s
activities
of
daily
living
must
be
markedly
restricted
by
reason
of
a
physical
or
mental
impairment.
Currently,
the
terms
“markedly
restricted”
and
“activities
of
daily
living”
are
not
defined
in
the
Income
Tax
Act
but
rather
are
set
out
in
administrative
guidelines
published
by
Revenue
Canada.
The
current
guidelines
will
be
included
in
the
law
so
as
to
ensure
greater
fairness
and
uniformity
in
their
interpretation
and
application.
The
expression
“markedly
restricted”
will
continue
to
mean
that,
despite
the
use
of
medication,
therapy,
or
devices,
the
effect
of
the
impairment
is
to
greatly
restrict
the
performance
of
activities
of
daily
living.
In
addition,
the
expression
“activities
of
daily
living”
will
continue
to
refer
to
basic
functions
such
as
seeing,
hearing,
speaking
and
walking,
but
not
working
or
social,
recreational
and
housekeeping
activities.
The
codification
of
these
definitions
in
the
legislation
does
not
change
the
existing
eligibility
criteria.
The
appellant
did
not
demonstrate
her
inability
to
feed
and
dress
herself
in
general;
she
certainly
proved
that
she
had
very
real
difficulties
with
respect
to
certain
specific
actions.
However,
the
Act
requires
inability
to
perform
a
basic
activity
of
daily
living;
if
the
basic
activity
of
daily
living
can
be
performed,
the
individual
must
necessarily
require
an
inordinate
amount
of
time
to
perform
it
in
order
to
be
entitled
to
the
credit
provided
under
the
Act.
The
evidence
is
that
in
1993
she
required
more
time
to
perform
only
certain
acts
and
actions.
Overall,
she
could
dress
and
feed
herself
without
requiring
an
inordinate
amount
of
time
to
do
so.
Paul
Gagnon
and
Marcellin
Laporte,
a
general
practitioner
and
an
orthopaedic
surgeon,
respectively,
both
attested
to
the
appellant’s
total
disability
since
January
27,
1987.
Her
disability
resulted
from
work-related
accidents
and
the
diagnosis
was
patellofemoral
syndrome
(chondromalacia
of
the
kneecap).
Asa
result
of
the
accidents
and
surgery
which
followed,
it
appears
from
the
medical
evidence
that
the
appellant
must
use
a
cane
to
move
about
because
of
the
weakness
in
her
knee.
There
was
no
basic
activity
of
daily
living
that
she
was
unable
to
perform.
Moreover,
on
January
13,
1995,
Dr.
Marcellin
Laporte
responded
in
the
negative
to
the
question:
“Does
your
patient
have
a
severe
impairment?”.
For
all
these
reasons
I
must
dismiss
the
appeal.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content