Hugessen, J.A.: —Despite the best efforts of counsel for the appellant we can see no basis for disagreeing with McNair, J.'s very thorough reasons for judgment. He found the appellant's "ore haulers" to be "vehicles" within the intendment of

Hugessen, J.A.:—We are all in agreement with the decision of Addy, J. confirming Judge Sarchuk. They both found that the legal fees paid by the appellant in securing his acquittal of a criminal charge were not “incurred by him in collecting salary or

Dubé, J.: —This unusual action is launched by two residents of Swan River, Manitoba, as a result of the local postmaster having issued blank money orders in exchange for cheques delivered to an accountant by the plaintiffs intended for the

Stone, J.A. (Hugessen and Décary, JJ.A. concurring):—We are all of the view that this appeal must be dismissed.

Pinard, J.: —Par son action, la demanderesse réclame de la défenderesse le remboursement d'un montant de $24,975.46 à titre de retour d'impôts.

MacGuigan, J.A.: — The motions judge allowed an extension of time for appealing a decision of the Tax Court under subsection 167(4) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the "Act"), without

Cullen, J.:—This is an appeal from a reassessment by Revenue Canada of the plaintiff's 1984 income tax return. The issue is whether the plaintiff had received a taxable benefit in respect of the forgiveness of a non-interest bearing loan from his

Décary, J.A.:—The Court has before it an appeal from a judgment by Pinard, J., which dismissed the appeal brought by the appellant from a notice of assessment issued by the Deputy Minister of National Revenue for the 1980 taxation year.

Teitelbaum, J. [Orally]:—Thank you, Mr. Wolofsky. I think I am ready to render my judgment. As is usual with M Wolofsky, he always comes out with very interesting arguments. In this particular case, 1, with all due respect, do not agree with

Cullen, J.:—This is an appeal from a determination of a question of law by the Tax Court of Canada, pursuant to subsection 174(4.1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the 'Act"). The appeal