Caroline Ahn

The parties brought cross-motions to compel answers to questions refused during examinations for discovery in an appeal involving allegations of sham transactions and the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR).

The Respondent also sought leave to amend its replies to withdraw certain factual assumptions.

The Tax Court of Canada granted both motions to compel in part, ordering further answers and productions where relevant to the objective reality of the transactions and the Minister's GAAR policy, while protecting privileged communications.

The Court also granted the Respondent leave to amend its replies, provided the amendments were made with greater clarity.

The parties brought cross-motions to compel better answers to questions posed during examinations for discovery.

The respondent also sought leave to amend its replies.

The Tax Court of Canada granted and denied the motions to compel in part, in accordance with a separate directive order, and granted the respondent leave to amend its replies subject to directions.

The Respondent brought a motion to compel unredacted copies of five documents over which the Appellants claimed solicitor-client privilege during examinations for discovery.

The Tax Court of Canada reviewed the unredacted documents and concluded that they contained legal advice and were protected by solicitor-client privilege.

The Respondent's motion for unredacted copies was denied.