Motion disposed of upon written representations
Before: The Honourable Justice Gabrielle St-Hilaire
Appearances:
| Agent for the Appellant:
|
Asfand Malik
|
| Counsel for the Respondent:
|
Katie Beahen
|
ORDER
Whereas the Appellant brought a motion pursuant to Rule 30(2) of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) to be represented in its general procedure appeal by Asfand Malik, a non-lawyer;
And whereas the Appellant requests that the motion be disposed of upon consideration of written representations and without appearance by the parties;
And whereas the Respondent opposes the motion;
Upon consideration of the parties’ written representations;
It is ordered that the application be held in abeyance until the Federal Court of Appeal has rendered its decision in The Queen v. BCS Group Services Inc. appeal (file A-204-18).
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 19th day of July 2019.
“Gabrielle St-Hilaire”
Citation: 2019 TCC 153
Date: 20190719
Docket: 2019-1921(GST)G
BETWEEN:
PROJECT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES INC.,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR ORDER
St-Hilaire J.
[1]
The Appellant brought a motion to request that Asfand Malik, who is not a lawyer, represent it in its appeal under the general procedure. The Respondent opposes the motion.
[2]
The grounds for the motion are that Mr. Malik has worked on “this matter from the very start”. I note that the Appellant did not provide any material supporting its motion for leave of the Court to have non-counsel represent the corporation.
[3]
This Court has rendered a number of decisions on the issue of whether section 17.1 of the Tax Court of Canada Act (the Act) and section 30 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) (the Rules) allow a corporation to be represented other than by counsel in a general procedure appeal. In some matters such as Masa Sushi Japanese Restaurant Inc. v. The Queen, Suchocki Accounting Ltd. v. The Queen, and Masa Sushi Japanese Restaurant Inc. v. The Queen, the Court determined that the legislation does not allow a corporate appellant to be represented by non-counsel.
[4]
In other matters, such as BCS Group and Sutlej Foods Inc. v. The Queen, the Court determined that the Act and the Rules do permit, with leave of the Court, the appointment of non-counsel to represent a corporation in a general procedure appeal.
[5]
This Court’s decision in BCS Group has been appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal and a requisition for hearing has been filed.
[6]
In light of the pending decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in the BCS Group matter, which involves the very issue that underlies this motion, and for which differing views have been taken by this Court, it is ordered that this motion be held in abeyance until the Federal Court of Appeal has rendered its decision.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 19th day of July 2019.
“Gabrielle St-Hilaire”
Email this Content