Her Majesty the Queen v. Ichi Canada Ltd., [1995] 2 CTC 120 -- text

Joyal J.:-The plaintiff is appealing a decision of the Tax Court of Canada rendered on December 17, 1987, wherein it allowed the defendant’s appeal to the extent that the limitative provisions of subsection 31(1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the "Act”) did not apply to the defendant for its 1982 taxation year. The case before this Court now proceeds by way of a trial de novo.

Donna Cardinal, Dihla Catherwood, Shona Chamberlin, Carol Coulter, Val Denys, Rosanna Dunlop, Louise Eberle, Cheryl Fairbairn, Linda Gorgichuk, Johanna Hansen, Darlene Hurry, Jackie Johner, Cheryl Lawrence, Darlene Lazenby, Sharon Loucks, Annette Macdonald, Della Marcia, Debra Metz, Bonnie Pasterfield, Donna Polowick, Theresa Scheller and Cheryl Stewart v. Her Majesty the Queen, as Represented by the Minister of National Revenue and the Attorney General of Canada, [1995] 2 CTC 99 -- text

Tremblay-Lamer J.:-This is a motion to certify a class for a class action suit. The action itself is based on the ruling of the Federal Court of Appeal in Thibaudeau v. Canada. [1994] 2 C.T.C. 4, 94 D.T.C. 6230 (since reversed by the Supreme Court: [1995] 1 C.T.C. 382, 95 D.T.C. 5273). In that decision, the Court of Appeal found that a provision of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.), c.

The Queen v. Mara Properties Ltd., 95 DTC 5168, [1995] 2 CTC 86 (FCA), rev'd 96 DTC 6309, [1996] 2 SCR 161 -- text

Marceau J.A.:-I have had the advantage of reading the reasons for judgment prepared by my brother McDonald. Unfortunately, my analysis of the legal principles applicable to the facts of this case does not lead me to the conclusion which he has

Pages

Subscribe to Tax Interpretations RSS