Aleksandrs Zemdegs

The appellant brought an application under Rule 58 for a determination of a question of law regarding the Tax Court's jurisdiction.

The issue was whether the Minister's decision to deny a downward transfer pricing adjustment under subsection 247(10) of the Income Tax Act falls outside the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Tax Court.

The Court held that the Minister's decision is an essential component of the assessment and goes to its correctness, meaning it can be reviewed by the Tax Court under its exclusive appellate jurisdiction.

The appellant appealed an order interpreting the term 'legal custody' in a trust agreement between former common law spouses.

The motion judge had interpreted the phrase in accordance with s. 20 of the Children's Law Reform Act.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the motion judge erred by failing to construe the words in the context of the whole agreement to give effect to the parties' intent.

The Court held that the self-represented parties intended 'legal custody' to mean custody pursuant to a court order, and ordered the sum of $104,620.80 paid to the appellant.