Chevron Canada Resources Ltd. v. MNR, 99 DTC 5648 (FCTD)

The taxpayer filed waivers with respect to its 1985 and 1986 taxation years, was reassessed by the Minister beyond the waiver period in respect of the matters referred to in the waivers, and was further reassessed by the Minister, following an appeal by the taxpayer, pursuant to a judgment of the Tax Court issued pursuant to a consent to judgment. In finding that the taxpayer was not entitled to an order of mandamus requiring the Minister to further reassess the taxpayer in respect of essentially the same matters in light of a subsequent development (the decision in The Queen v. Gulf Canada Resources Ltd., 92 DTC 6123 (FCA) and a resulting memorandum of understanding between an industry association and the Minister) Teitelbaum J. stated (at p. 5655):

"I am satisfied that subsection 165(1.1) of the Act was enacted with the intention of limiting the right of reassessment of matters forming the subject of a judgment by the Court. In effect, it serves as a reinforcement on the rule of res judicata in the context of appeals against an amount of assessment."

The taxpayer filed waivers with respect to its 1985 and 1986 taxation years, was reassessed by the Minister beyond the waiver period in respect of the matters referred to in the waivers, and was further reassessed by the Minister, following an appeal by the taxpayer, pursuant to a judgment of the Tax Court issued pursuant to a consent to judgment. In responding to an argument that the Minister was still able to reassess the taxpayer for those taxation years in respect of the same matter in light of a subsequent development (the decision in The Queen v. Gulf Canada Resources Ltd., 92 DTC 6123 (FCA) and a resulting memorandum of understanding between an industry association and the Minister), Teitelbaum J. stated (at pp. 5654-5):

"While I am in agreement with the submission of the applicant that the waivers are unlimited and enabled the Minister to reassess as often as required, he is not obliged by the waivers to reassess. Therefore, although he has the authority to act on the waiver, he is under no duty, particularly after several reassessments have already been issued."