The appellants were investigated by Revenue Canada for claiming fraudulent limited partnership losses related to software valuation.
Search warrants were issued based on an Information to Obtain (ITO) that relied on an outside consultant's opinion, which the deponent incorrectly described as a 'valuation report'.
The appellants applied to quash the warrants, arguing the ITO was deceptive and improperly relied on hearsay.
The application judge dismissed the application, finding no deliberate deception and that the remaining information was sufficient to issue the warrants.
The appellants appealed.
The Crown moved to quash the appeal as moot because the seized items had been returned and no charges laid.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion to quash, exercising its discretion to hear the moot appeal.
On the merits, the Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the application judge's findings that the mischaracterization was not deliberate and that the deponent was entitled to rely on hearsay from other Revenue Canada employees and hired consultants.
