McNair, J:—The actions shown in this consolidated style of cause are appeals by the three plaintiffs from assessments for income tax which were tried before the Honourable Mr Justice Cattanach on April 19, 20, 21 and 22, 1983 and May 11, 1983.
Dubé, J:—The issue to be resolved in these three income tax cases is whether the sum of $18,000, $19,000 and $17,000 paid by the plaintiff to his wife on April 24, 1979, January 1, 1980 and January 1, 1981, respectively are deductible under
Heald, J:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Trial Division which dismissed the appellant’s (plaintiffs) appeal from a decision of the Tax Review Board with respect to the respondent’s 1976 taxation year. The sole issue in the appeal is
MacGuigan, J:—The respondent disputes a reassessment of income tax for the 1972 taxation year. The dispute is over the taxability of the proceeds of a sale of land which respondent alleges took place in 1968 but which the Minister of National
McNair, J:—This is an application of the plaintiff to amend his statement of claim by deleting several paragraphs therefrom and substituting others and by adding a new paragraph. The statement of claim was filed on August 26, 1982 and the statement
Hugessen, J:—The Saskatchewan Wheat Pool is a grain dealer. As such it operates about 950 primary elevators in Saskatchewan. It also operates terminal elevators in Thunder Bay and Vancouver. This appeal concerns the Pool’s right to claim inventory allowance in
McNair, J:—This is a combined ex parte application of the applicant for an order to show cause why certain securities should not be charged to secure payment of the sum of $31,469.54 alleged to be due Her Majesty by virtue of a
MacGuigan, J:—This is an appeal under section 60 of the Excise Tax Act from a declaration by the Tariff Board under subsection 59(1) of the Act that four chlorine derivatives added to swimming pool water (trichloro-s-triazinetrione,
Vallerand, JA:—L’appelante qui a déposé deux plaintes contre l’intimé se pourvoit ici contre le jugement de la Cour supérieure qui, confirmant celui du tion sur la première.
The Associate Chief Justice:—This application for a writ of prohibition or an interim and permanent injunction came on for hearing at Toronto, Ontario, on June 9, 1984. Counsel for the applicant abandoned the relief sought in all but paragraph
