DR H Hoyle Campbell v. Her Majesty the Queen, [1976] CTC 450, 76 DTC 6278

Heald, J:—In my reasons for judgment of November 1, 1974 I said at the conclusion thereof [[1974 CTC 783 at 791]:

At the commencement of the trial, both counsel agreed that if the plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed on the question of principle, the assessments herein should be referred back to the Minister for reconsideration and final determination on the question of quantum of the amounts to be finally added to the plaintiff’s income for the taxation years under review. I so direct.

After such reconsideration, the matter may be spoken to further.

Pursuant to that direction, counsel for the parties spoke to the matter further on July 7, 1976 and advised me that they have been unable to agree on the question of the quantum of the amounts to be finally added to the plaintiff’s income for the taxation years 1967, 1968 and 1969.

Based on the true facts as adduced in evidence at the trial and applying the provisions of the Income Tax Act to those facts, and after hearing counsel for both parties and satisfying myself that the order which I am making does not offend the principles set out by the Federal Court of Appeal in the case of Galway v MNR, [1974] 1 FC 593 at 600; [1974] CTC 313 at 316; 74 DTC 6247 at 6249, I have concluded that the following amounts should be added to the plaintiff’s net income as “Professional Fee Income”:

I accordingly order that subject appeal be allowed and the reassessment of the plaintiff for the taxation years 1967, 1968 and 1969 be referred back to the Minister for further reassessment not inconsistent with these supplementary reasons for judgment.

Since there has been divided success of this appeal, I will make no order as to costs.