McQuaid, J.:—This is an application for an order pursuant to subsection 232(4) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148, as amended, for a determination whether Martin Visser enjoys a solicitor-client privilege with respect to
Sherstobitoff, J.A.: — The major issue on this appeal is the validity of a certificate under subsection 244(4) of the Income Tax Act, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63, certifying the day on which evidence, sufficient in the opinion of
Stratton, C.J.N.B.:— The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant's Registered Retirement Savings Plan of which the respondent is trustee could be collapsed by the trustee and the proceeds paid over to Revenue Canada pursuant to a demand made under
Angers, J.A.: —On the basis of ex parte applications made by the agents of the Minister of National Revenue, Turnbull, J. of the Court of Queen's Bench issued search warrants on July 5, 1986 with respect to the appellant
Kurisko, J.: —This is an application brought before me as a local judge of the Supreme Court of Ontario by the above-named solicitors under section 232 of the Income Tax Act to determine their claim of solicitor and client
Peter A.K. Giles, A.S.P.:—The plaintiffs in this case have each been reassessed for income tax purposes in each of five taxation years. Most of the transactions in each year giving rise to the reassessment of each plaintiff in each year
Rouleau, J.:—The plaintiff appeals the notices of reassessment issued by the Minister of National Revenue with respect to his 1980 to 1984 taxation years. This action was commenced by statement of claim on November 25, 1986.
Strayer, J.: —
Stone, J.:—This appeal is from a judgment rendered April 8, 1988 by McNair, J. in the Trial Division, whereby he dismissed a claim by the appellant for recovery of a sum of money which the respondent had set up in statutory set-off!
Reed, J.:—The main issue in this case concerns the extent to which the separate corporate identity of a subsidiary company can be ignored. This question is sometimes phrased by asking, "when do the courts lift the corporate veil”; or perhaps more
