Hargrave P.— This motion, in writing pursuant to Rule 324, is brought by the Crown to strike out the plaintiff’s statement of claim for want of prosecution or, alternatively, by reason of the failure of the plaintiff to provide an affidavit of
Nadon J.:— The question is as to the validity of a seizure in execution carried out on the movable property found in the premises of a Montréal restaurant, namely the Kozak restaurant ("the restaurant") located at 250 rue Beaubien est.
Giles A.S.P.:— These proceedings purport to have been commenced by an originating notice of motion and seek an order in the nature of mandamus. The motion before me is an interlocutory motion seeking to strike the originating notice of
Teitelbaum J.:— This is an appeal from a reassessment of income tax wherein the Minister of National Revenue (the Minister) disallowed certain expenses related to initial costs and property taxes of Property Investment Project 79-1, Cambridge Place, an investment
Hugessen J.A. (DéCary J.A., Chevalier D.J. concurring)— We are all of the view that the learned Tax Court Judge asked himself the right question when he said the real question in the present case is whether there was
Pinard J.:—This is an appeal brought by the plaintiff against the defendant pursuant to subsection 165(7) and subsection 172(2) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1 (the "Act") and in force at the relevant time, from
Rothstein J.:— Casmer Stanwick submits that the conversion from the tax deduction to the tax credit system in the Income Tax Act in 1987 discriminates against taxpayers in tax brackets higher than the 17 per cent bracket. He
Rouleau J.:— This is an appeal from a notice of assessment issued by the Minister of National Revenue disallowing a refundable investment tax credit which the plaintiff claimed in its 1987 taxation year.
Rouleau J.:— This is an appeal from an assessment of the Minister of National Revenue with respect to the plaintiff’s 1984 taxation year.
McDonald J.A.:— This is an application for judicial review from a judgment of the Tax Court of Canada dated November 22, 1994, which dismissed the applicant’s appeals of reassessments of his 1990 and 1991 taxation years. The Tax Court decision relates
