John R. Power

The Minister of National Revenue petitioned a taxpayer into bankruptcy for unpaid taxes.

The trustee in bankruptcy brought an action against the taxpayer's wife, seeking a declaration that certain assets in her name belonged to the bankrupt's estate.

At trial, Revenue Canada officials testified about the taxpayer's affairs, over the wife's objection that the Income Tax Act prohibited such disclosure.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the trustee's action was a proceeding 'relating to the administration or enforcement' of the Income Tax Act under s. 241(3), thereby permitting the disclosure of the confidential tax information.

The appellants were investigated for income tax evasion and search warrants were issued under s. 231.3 of the Income Tax Act.

After the initial warrants were quashed, a second warrant was issued.

The appellants challenged the second warrant and the constitutionality of s. 231.3 by way of an originating petition for a declaration.

The British Columbia Supreme Court dismissed the application, and the Court of Appeal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the matter was criminal in nature.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from an action for a declaration, and that s. 231.3 of the Income Tax Act violates s. 8 of the Charter.

The appellants appealed a Federal Court of Appeal decision quashing search warrants issued under section 231.3 of the Income Tax Act.

The respondents challenged the warrants, arguing that section 231.3 violated section 8 of the Charter by using the imperative word 'shall', thereby removing the authorizing judge's residual discretion to refuse a warrant even if statutory criteria were met.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that a residual discretion is an indispensable requirement for a reasonable search under section 8 of the Charter.

Section 231.3(3) was declared to be of no force or effect.

The appellants sought to quash search warrants issued ex parte under section 231.3 of the Income Tax Act.

The issuing judge reviewed the warrants but dismissed the application.

The Court of Appeal held it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that sections 231.3 and 239 of the Income Tax Act are criminal in nature, deriving their constitutional validity from the federal criminal law power.

Consequently, any right of appeal must be found in federal statute, and since neither the Income Tax Act nor the Criminal Code provides for an appeal from the issuance of a search warrant, no appeal lies.

The Lieutenant-Governor in Council of New Brunswick referred questions to the Court of Appeal regarding the constitutional validity of establishing a unified criminal court with provincially appointed judges to try all indictable offences.

The Court of Appeal answered the questions in the affirmative.

On appeal, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the proposal was unconstitutional, as it would effectively transform an inferior court into a superior court, thereby depriving the Governor General of the power to appoint judges under section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

The respondent, a plastic surgeon, incorporated a private hospital and entered into an employment contract with it, assigning his surgical fees to the hospital in exchange for a salary.

The Minister of National Revenue assessed the assigned fees as the respondent's personal income, arguing the hospital was illegally practising medicine.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the Crown's appeal, holding that the respondent, not the hospital, was practising medicine, and the assignment of fees to the hospital under a valid employment contract did not make the fees assessable to the respondent.