Jacques Ouellet

The appellants appealed a Superior Court judge's decision not to review his initial approval of an authorization to enter and seize under section 231(4) of the Income Tax Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, following its concurrent decision in Goodman v. Rompkey, which held that there is no right of appeal to the Court of Appeal from such an approval or a revised approval.

The appellants sought an injunction in the Federal Court Trial Division to prohibit the respondents from filing a Minister's certificate under s. 244(4) of the Income Tax Act in the Court of Sessions of the Peace.

The certificate established the date evidence came to the Minister's knowledge, which affected the limitation period for summary conviction tax evasion charges.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the filing of the certificate is merely a statutory mode of proof and does not constitute an administrative decision or the exercise of a discretionary power.

Therefore, the Minister was not acting as a 'federal board, commission or other tribunal' under s. 18 of the Federal Court Act, and the Trial Division had no jurisdiction to grant the injunction.

The appellant, a chartered accountant, appealed a decision of the Court of Appeal for Quebec which held that no appeal lies from a Superior Court judge's approval of a search and seizure authorization issued by the Minister of National Revenue under the Income Tax Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, concluding that the judge's approval does not constitute a final judgment under the Code of Civil Procedure, as it merely permits the search and does not determine the rights of the parties or terminate a proceeding.

The Court also found that the Superior Court judge did not exceed his jurisdiction in granting the approval.