Chell - What does director's liability have in common with Catch 22?

Hogan J. found that the taxpayer's management of two business corporations following his resignation as director was enough to make him a de facto director, and therefore liable for the corporations' unremitted source deductions and GST collections.

The taxpayer's "management" of the two businesses mainly related to addressing the unpaid source deductions/GST - such as dealing with CRA on the corporations' behalf, arranging for asset sales, and lining up a prospective client (and keeping CRA apprised of the potential resulting revenue stream).  In other words, the two-year limitations period arguably had not expired only because the taxpayer had tried to resolve the prior remittance failures.

If this case is correct, the jurisprudence imposing director's liability for de facto directors seems to have grown beyond the cautiously worded introduction of the concept in Mosier v. The Queen, [2001] GSTC 124, Docket: 96-3504-GST-G (TCC).

Scott Armstrong.  Summary of Chell v. The Queen, 2013 TCC 29, under s. 227.1(1).