Teskey, J.T.C.C.:—The appellant appeals his 1989 assessment, wherein the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister"), assessed income tax on a lump sum payment received by the appellant from his United States employer ("U.S." employer).

Bell, J.T.C.C.:—This appeal, respecting the 1986 and 1987 taxation years of the appellant, is from reassessments which added the sum of $37,821.88 to his 1986 income and the sum of $32,145.26 to his 1987 income pursuant to the provisions of subsection

Kempo, J.T.C.C.:—The informal procedure appeals of Morray Investments Ltd., of Ronald D. Berube and of his wife, Joanne Berube were, on consent application, joined for hearing on common evidence.

Bonner, J.T.C.C. (orally):—1 will deal first with the technical matters. There was no assessment of tax for the 1986 taxation year. Rather the appellant was notified that no tax was payable and in accordance with the principle laid down by the

Christie, A.C.J.T.C.C. (orally):—1 shall now deliver the reasons for judgment that shall issue in the appeals of Alan C. Gregory v. The Queen.

Lamarre, Proulx, J.T.C.C.:—At issue are two motions, one from the appellant, the other from the respondent, heard simultaneously. In his motion filed on October 28, 1993, the appellant asked that the respondent file a list as well as a complete

Sarchuk, J.T.C.C. (orally):—These appeals concern assessments of tax with respect to the appellant’s 1986 and 1987 taxation years. In assessing the appellant for the 1986 taxation year, the Minister of National Revenue included in income an amount of

Beaubier, J.T.C.C.:—This appeal pursuant to the General Procedure of this Court was heard at Vancouver, British Columbia on February 2, 7 and 9, 1994. The appellant called the following witnesses:

Taylor, J.T.C.C.:—These are appeals under the informal procedure, heard in Calgary, Alberta, on December 8, 1993, against income tax assessments for the taxation years 1988 and 1989, in which the Minister of National Revenue increased the reported income of

Bowman, J.T.C.C.:—This appeal is from a reassessment for the 1991 taxation year under which the late Mrs. Chadwick was treated on having received a dividend on the redemption of her shares rather than a capital gain on the sale thereof.