Isaac C.J.: — The application is dismissed.

Robertson J.A.: — We are all of the view that Mogan J.T.C.C. did not err in concluding that the moneys received by the appellant were on account of income and not capital. We have not been persuaded that his appreciation of the

Harvey J.-The Attorney General of Canada, representing Her Majesty the Queen, applies by way of notices of motion dated July 5, 1994 and October 31, 1994, respectively, seeking orders of this court for payment to Her Majesty the Queen in Right of

Pratte J.A. (Chief Justice and McDonald, JJ.A., concurring)— We are all of the opinion that the application must succeed. The Tax Court held that the pension received by the respondent under the Defence Services

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, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63 as amended and in force at the relevant time (the

Mogan J.T.C.C.:-When the appellant in 1993 filed his income tax return for the 1992 taxation year, he made the usual computations of taxable income, tax payable and the amounts deducted and remitted by his employer with respect to income tax. As a result of

Bowman J.T.C.C.:-These appeals, from reassessments for 1991 and 1992, involve the question whether amounts received by the appellant from the University of Manitoba for a course of lectures given by him are his income or that of his wife’s company.

McArthur J.T.C.C.:-These appeals were heard in Winnipeg, Manitoba with respect to the appellant’s 1985, 1986 and 1989 taxation years.

Bowman J.T.C.C.:-These appeals are from reassessments for the appellant’s 1992 and 1993 taxation years whereby the Minister of National Revenue denied to the appellant a disability tax credit under sections 118.3 and 118.4 of the Income Tax Act.

Kempo J.T.C.C.:-This general procedure appeal concerns the appellant’s 1989 taxation year.