O’Connor J.T.C.C.: — These appeals were heard on common evidence in Toronto, Ontario on October 23, 1995 pursuant to the Informal Procedure of this Court.

Sarchuk J.T.C.C.: — William J. Brown appeals from assessments of tax with respect to his 1989, 1990 and 1991 taxation years. In computing his income for those years the Appellant deducted the amounts of $68,039.88, $119,111.63 and $65,012.01 respectively

Mogan J.T.C.C.: — In November 1987, the Appellant agreed to sell to Pan West Financial Inc. for $750,000 a 13-acre portion of Lot 7 (a parcel of land which will be described in greater detail below) in Langley, B.C. On April 29,

Bowman J.T.C.C. (orally): — I think I’m in a position to render judgment. This is an appeal from reassessments for 1992 and 1993 of the Appellant, in which she was denied the disability tax credit provided under Section 118.3 of the

Lamarre J.T.C.C.: — This is an appeal under the informal procedure against an assessment issued by the Minister of National Revenue (hereinafter “the Minister”) in respect of the appellant’s 1990 taxation year. In computing his income, the appellant reported

Hunter J.: — The taxpayer, Marie Steele (“Steele”) applies for a review of the jeopardy order obtained by the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) on October 24, 1995. The Minister obtained the order pursuant to subsection 225.2(2) of the

Nadon J.: — By application the Crown in right of Canada is asking this Court to convict Bertrand Fortin (“Mr. Fortin”) of contempt of court.

The relevant facts are as follows.

John A. Hargrave Prothonotary: — The defendant seeks to have this action, commenced in march of 1987, dismissed for want or prosecution. There is no issue as to the test to be applied: it is the three-part test set out by

Rouleau J.: — The Department of National Revenue is claiming a substantial sum from Coffrages Universel Ltée for unpaid taxes. After the Federal Court issued a writ of fieri facias, some of that company’s assets were seized in

Robertson J.A.: — The Tax Court Judge, Christie A.C.J.T.C. held that the respective appellants did not hold their condominium for the purpose of producing income and, therefore, are not entitled to deduct a “terminal loss” stemming from its ultimate