Mogan J.T.C.C.: — This is an appeal in respect of the taxation years, 1989, 1990 and 1991, in which the Appellant has elected the informal procedure. The only issue before the Court is whether certain losses can be deducted by the Appellant

Bowie J.T.C.C.: — These two appeals were heard together on common evidence by agreement of the parties. The sole issue for decision is whether the ostensible sale by each of these Appellants of the shares they held in Silvertip Holdings Ltd.

Garon J.T.C.C.: - This is an appeal from an assessment by the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) for the 1992 taxation year. By that assessment, the Minister disallowed a deduction of $16,164 claimed by the appellant as a business

Bowie J.T.C.C.: — Mr. MacKenzie was originally assessed under the Income Tax Act (the Act) for the year 1993 on August 5, 1994. He was reassessed on September 29, 1994. When filing his return for that year he had

Hamlyn J.T.C.C.: - These are appeals for the 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years.

Rowe D.J.T.C.C.: — The appellant, Lorenz, appeals from an assessment of income tax with respect to the 1989 taxation year.

Teskey J.T.C.C.: — The Appellant elected, in her Notice of Appeal, wherein she appealed from her assessment of income tax for the years 1993 and 1994, the informal procedure.

Beaubier J.T.C.C.: — This matter was heard at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan on October 21 and 22, 1996. The Appellant and her chartered accountant since the assessments in this matter, Audry Kawula, C.A. were the only witnesses. The Appellant has appealed

Mogan J.T.C.C.: — This is a motion by the Appellant for costs in connection with an application by the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) to add a third party to the appeal herein. The story begins with litigation in the

Sarchuk J.T.C.C.: - This is in the matter of Jane Hanson versus Her Majesty The Queen. The matter for determination in this appeal is whether the Appellant is vicariously liable under subsection 227.1(1) of the