John Matt David Buote

The Minister of National Revenue brought a motion to strike three affidavits filed by Gold Line Telemanagement Inc. in opposition to an application under section 311 of the Excise Tax Act.

The Court struck portions of the expert affidavit of Timo Vainionpaa that directly challenged the CRA's analysis of call detail records, finding them irrelevant to the preliminary stages of the application.

However, the Court declined to strike the balance of the Vainionpaa affidavit or the factual affidavits of Joel Bowers and Alexei Tretiakov, finding they provided necessary technical background and foundational evidence.

The Trustee in bankruptcy sought to set aside alleged transfers at undervalue made by the bankrupt to his estranged spouse and two sons in the two years prior to bankruptcy.

The court found the payments made in the year immediately preceding bankruptcy to be transfers at undervalue, as the respondents failed to provide compelling corroborating evidence for an alleged oral separation agreement.

However, the court found the bankrupt was not insolvent at the time of the payments made in the second year prior to bankruptcy, thus those transfers were not set aside.

The appellant appealed a section 160 assessment in respect of a property transferred to her by her spouse.

The appellant argued that she gave consideration for the property and that the underlying reassessments of her spouse's 1988 and 1989 taxation years were statute-barred.

The Tax Court of Canada found that the appellant gave no consideration for the property.

However, the Court held that the underlying reassessments were statute-barred because the Minister failed to prove that valid waivers were filed within the normal reassessment periods.

The appeal was allowed and the assessment referred back to the Minister for reconsideration and reassessment.

The appellants, directors of a restaurant corporation, appealed assessments for unremitted GST/HST under subsection 323(1) of the Excise Tax Act.

They argued the underlying tax was paid and that the Crown failed to prove execution of the certificate was returned unsatisfied.

The Tax Court of Canada found the underlying tax liability was established and that documentary evidence, including a levy report and writ of seizure, proved execution was returned unsatisfied.

The appeals were dismissed.

The appellant appealed a summary judgment motion in favour of the respondent bank for recovery of $58,126.03 on an outstanding line of credit account.

The appellant raised three grounds of appeal: (1) the motion judge relied on a 1988 line of credit agreement when the statement of claim referenced a 1994 agreement; (2) the respondent's affiant relied on hearsay evidence and failed to provide proper notice of business records; and (3) the motion judge failed to provide reasons for awarding post-judgment interest at a rate higher than the statutory rate.

The Court of Appeal dismissed all grounds of appeal and upheld the summary judgment.

The applicant sought declarations that a transfer of pledged shares and a buy‑sell notice issued under a unanimous shareholders agreement were null and void.

The dispute arose from a promissory note and share pledge agreement relating to the purchase of shares in a private corporation.

The respondent claimed that the applicant defaulted on the promissory note, triggering its rights to transfer pledged shares and invoke a buy‑sell mechanism with a penalty provision.

The court found that no proper written notice of default had been proven in accordance with the parties’ contractual requirements.

As a result, the respondent could not rely on the penalty provision of the shareholders agreement, and the applicant’s requested declaratory relief was granted.