MacGuigan J.T.C.C.: — This appeal is taken as to two paragraphs relating to costs in an interlocutory order by the Tax Court joining one Helga Georg as a party to an appeal brought by the respondent against the appellant.

Hugessen J.T.C.C.: — This is an appeal by the Crown from a judgment of the Tax Court of Canada allowing the respondent taxpayer’s appeal against a reassessment to income tax.

Hugessen J.A.: — We are all of the view that there was evidence permitting the Tax Court judge to find, as he did, that the applicant “in his capacity as director did not exercise any care, diligence or skill to prevent the failure”

McKeown J.T.C.C.: — Scannar Industries Inc. (Scannar) appeals the assessment for tax made by the Minister of National Revenue (the Minister) under the Scientific Research Tax Credit (SRTC) provisions of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C.

Isaac C.J.: — This application by the Crown was heard at the same time as similar applications in Court Files A-305-94 and A-306-94. A copy of these reasons shall be filed in each of these files and when so filed, shall constitute

Stone J.A.: — This is an application to review and set aside a decision of Kampo J.T.C.C. of February 27, 1995, made upon a review of taxation of costs by the Registrar of that Court and in particular a disbursement incurred by the

Robertson J.A.: — This appeal is brought pursuant to subsection 172(3) of the Income Tax Act (the “Act”) from a notice of intention, issued by the Minister of National Revenue, to revoke the appellant’s registration as a

Stone J.T.C.C.: — In our view as it was the female parent who, on the facts as found below, was the person who “primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing” of the children of the marriage, only that parent may be properly regarded

Charron J.: — The applicants seek a declaration that the definition of spouse in the Income Tax Act, S.C. 1992 and regulations thereto, as it applies to the registration of pension plans, is contrary to subsection 15(1) of