Date: 20091120
Docket: T-708-08
Citation: 2009 FC 1197
Ottawa, Ontario, November 20, 2009
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice O'Reilly
BETWEEN:
MINISTER
OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Applicant
and
ROBERT
JOHN JACKSON
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1]
At a hearing on April 21, 2009, I informed the
respondent, Robert John Jackson, that I would allow him 100 days to purge his
contempt of an Order of this Court dated August 11, 2008. That Order had
required Robert John to provide, within 30 days, information and documents
sought by the Minister of National Revenue under the Income Tax Act, R.S.C.
1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.) and to pay costs of $751.78. I also asked the
applicant to respond to the materials filed at the hearing by Robert John on or
before June 30, 2009, and gave Robert John an opportunity to reply to the applicant’s
response on or before July 30, 2009.
[2]
At the April 21st hearing, and in my
subsequent Order of April 23rd, I agreed to suspend any ruling on
the issue of contempt until the materials described above had been filed and
Robert John had been given 100 days to comply with the outstanding Order. I
also indicated that, if Robert John had not complied with that Order within 100
days, I would rule on the issue of contempt on the basis of the submissions and
evidence provided at the hearing, as well as any affidavit evidence filed
subsequently.
[3]
Having reviewed all of the evidence and the
submissions of the parties, I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that
Robert John knowingly refused to comply with this Court’s Order of August 11,
2008 and, therefore, is in contempt of court. The evidence at the hearing
showed that:
• Robert
John Jackson was served with a requirement to produce information.
• He did
not produce the information requested.
• He returned to the CRA copies of documents that had been
sent to him. Some of those documents bore his handwriting.
• He participated in the hearing that resulted in the
Court’s Order of August 11, 2008 and responded to the Order by indicating that
he had no information to provide and by submitting a variety of other documents
that were unresponsive to the Order.
• Through documents produced to the CRA by third parties,
it appears that he has a bank account, RRSPs, a quarter interest in a
commercial property in Canora, Saskatchewan, and employment income channelled
through a numbered company over which he has signing authority.
• These assets, interests and income existed during the
time-frame covered by the August 11, 2008 order (January 1, 2006 to January 31,
2008).
[4]
Robert John did not dispute this evidence or
present any evidence to the contrary.
[5]
Regarding the materials submitted by Robert John
before the hearing, they purport to create contractual agreements with various third
parties and a trust interest in his favour. These documents have no legal
validity or effect on these proceedings.
[6]
After the hearing, Robert John submitted a
number of other documents, but none of them fall within the August 11, 2008
Order or my Order of April 21, 2009. In particular, Robert John filed:
• a letter purporting to impose on me a “Mandatory
Judicial Notice” and fiduciary and custodial responsibilities;
• various bonds in standard forms provided under United States regulations;
• sureties and releases from liens and escrow under U.S.
Government contract warranties; and
• a notice of settlement (signed by Robert John for both
parties) and not setting out any settlement terms relating to the issues in
dispute.
[7]
Like the other documents supplied by Robert
John, these materials do not have any legal validity or effect on these
proceedings. Clearly, Robert John is aware of this Court’s Orders and has
chosen not to comply with them. At the hearing on April 21, 2009, I explained his
obligations to him directly and, thereafter, gave him ample opportunity to
comply. He is in contempt of court.
[8]
Under the Federal Courts Rules,
SOR/98-106, s. 472, the punishment for contempt includes:
(a)
Imprisonment for less than five years or until
the person complies with the Order;
(b)
Imprisonment for less than five years if the
person fails to comply with the Order;
(c)
A fine;
(d)
Doing or refraining from doing any act;
(e)
Sequestration of property; and
(f)
Costs.
[9]
Having found Robert John to be in contempt of
court, I will now consider submissions from the parties on the issue of
punishment. The applicant may file written submissions on or before November
30, 2009. Robert John may respond in writing on or before December 14, 2009.
The applicant may reply on or before December 21, 2009. I leave the question of
further costs to be determined once I have received the parties’ submissions.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that
1.
The
respondent is found to be in contempt of court;
2.
The applicant’s written submissions on
punishment shall be filed on or before November 30, 2009;
3.
The respondent’s written submissions in response
shall be filed on or before December 14, 2009.
4.
The applicant’s reply, if any, shall be filed on
or before December 21, 2009.
“James
W. O’Reilly”
Email this Content