Linden, J:—These are appeals from two judgments of the Trial Division of this Court, dated March 27, 1987 dismissing appeals from decisions of the Tax Court of Canada dated October 30, 1984, which dealt with the taxes payable by the appellants in
Muldoon, Jj. [Orally]: —In the case of Robert D. Blake v. Canada, T-1424-84. This is a rather old case, as may be noted from its suit number in 1984, and it is old especially so, when one recalls that the
Reed, J.:—The defendant brings a motion to require the plaintiff to produce an officer to be examined for discovery. The dispute between the parties arises out of uncertainty as to the status of information obtained as a result of an examination for
Jerome, J. [Orally]:—Thank you, Mr. Witherspoon. I wish I could be more favourable in the judgment. I am afraid I have to dismiss your appeal. Here are my reasons.
Giles, A.S.P.:—The motion before me in this case on September 30, 1991, was for a stay under section 50 of the Federal Court Act or in the alternative dismissing the action for want of prosecution. I dismissed the motion. Counsel
Giles, A.S.P.: —I note that Rule 300(1) provides:
An individual may act in person or be represented by a solicitor in any proceedings in the Court.
Mahoney, J.A. [Marceau and MacGuigan, JJ.A concurring]:—This is an appeal from a reported decision of the Trial Division [1991] 1 C.T.C. 197; 91 D.T.C. 5085, which dismissed the appellant's appeal against its 1985 and 1986 income tax assessments imposing a
Dubé, J. [Translation]:—The question to be resolved in this tax case is whether the interest paid by the plaintiff in the 1983, 1984 and 1985 taxation years can be deducted from tax pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph 20(1)(c)(i) of the
Jerome, A.C.J.:—This is an action by way of appeal pursuant to sections 51.24 and 51.28 of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. E-13, as amended. The Attorney General of Canada (the "plaintiff") appeals a decision of the Tariff
