Andrey Pavlov

The defendants, an appraisal service, brought a summary judgment motion to dismiss a negligence action by the plaintiff mortgage financing company, MCAP, on the basis that the action was commenced beyond the applicable limitation period.

MCAP alleged that the defendants negligently overvalued a property in a 2012 appraisal, leading to a loss on a 2013 mortgage loan.

The court found that MCAP had sufficient knowledge to discover its claim by June 15, 2016, or at the latest, September 6, 2016, when it received various post-default valuations and opinions questioning the original appraisal's accuracy.

The court rejected MCAP's argument that its internal protocol justified delaying discovery until the property sale was complete or a retrospective valuation was obtained.

The motion for summary judgment was granted, and the action was dismissed as statute-barred.

The taxpayer engaged in forward foreign exchange straddle trading on the over-the-counter market to generate non-capital losses to offset his other income.

The Minister reassessed the taxpayer beyond the normal reassessment period, disallowing the losses on the basis that the trading was a sham and did not constitute a source of income, and assessed gross negligence penalties.

The Tax Court allowed the appeals for all years except 2002, finding that the trading was not a sham and constituted a source of income under the Stewart test.

For 2002, the Court found the taxpayer was grossly negligent in failing to report over $8 million in gains, justifying the reopening of that year and the imposition of a penalty.