Safdar Chaudhry v. Her Majesty the Queen (Informal Procedure), [1993] 2 CTC 2954

Christie, A.CJ.T.C.C.:—

THE REGISTRAR: The next matter is Safdar Chaudhry No. 92-1850, taxation years 1986 and 1987. There is an agent appearing for the appellant.

AGENT: Your Honour, my friend has some personal problems and I did not see him since Saturday.

HIS HONOUR: Pardon?

AGENT: I did not see him since Saturday.

HIS HONOUR: Right.

AGENT: So I would appreciate if you could give me an adjournment until next month, please.

HIS HONOUR: Is that all you have to say?

AGENT: Yes, sir.

MS. LUNDIE: Your Honour, briefly put, I will be moving to have the appeal dismissed at this point in time. By way of background, first the notice of hearing sent out by the Tax Court of Canada indicating that this date would be the hearing date, was dated the 16th of November, 1992. I sent Mr. Chaudhry what we call the carriage letter telling him that I was counsel for the respondent, and that letter was dated December 15, 1992.

I heard nothing from Mr. Chaudhry until last Friday, Friday past. At 11:30 I received a phone call from Mr. Chaudhry saying he wanted to send me a fax and he wanted an adjournment. When I asked him for what purpose he wanted an adjournment he told me that his lawyer could not make it. I said I had heard nothing of a lawyer and that he would have to attend today to speak to this matter.

With respect to the lawyer, as I said I have heard nothing of a lawyer. Mr. Chaudhry wrote his own appeal. I have had no communications from a lawyer indicating that a lawyer had carriage of the matter. As I said before, Mr. Chaudhry was told by myself that he would have to appear to speak to the adjournment.

I know that Mr. Dunlop in the Tax Court registrar's office in Ottawa was endeavouring to contact Mr. Chaudhry as I had indicated to Mr. Dunlop upon questioning that I would be opposing any request for an adjournment and expected to go ahead with the appeal today.

On that basis, Your Honour, I would submit that Mr. Chaudhry has demonstrated somewhat indifference towards his own appeal. He called me the Friday before and sent a fax requesting an adjournment. He does the same to the Tax Court registrar’s office in Ottawa.

He sends an agent who has no knowledge of why he is not here today. He has not seen fit to tell the Court for what reason he cannot appear after knowing since November that he would not be here today. I would submit that he has shown negligence or at least indifference to his own appeal.

On that basis, Your Honour, I would move under section 18.21 of the Tax Court of Canada Act to have the appeal dismissed since Mr. Chaudhry has failed to appear today and certainly was not entitled to an adjournment of this matter.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you, counsel.

Do you wish to say anything in reply to what counsel for the Crown has just said?

AGENT: No, Your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Well, this appeal is going to be dismissed. Nothing has been said here this morning that would warrant granting an adjournment. The appellant has had lots of time to indicate to the Court if there was a valid reason why it should be adjourned. He waits until it's too late to substitute another appeal in the place of this appeal that was to be heard this morning.

For those reasons and, I repeat, the fact that nothing was said this morning here that would warrant granting an adjournment, this appeal would be dismissed.

MS. LUNDIE: Thank you, Your Honour.

Appeal dismissed.