Sonia Bédard

The appellant appealed reassessments for the 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 taxation years that included his online poker winnings as business income.

The Tax Court of Canada found that the appellant had the subjective intention of making a profit by engaging in poker activities and that he was using his expertise and abilities to earn his living through poker.

The Court concluded that the appellant's poker activities constituted a business and that his net earnings were taxable as business income.

The appeal for the 2008 taxation year was dismissed, and the appeals for the 2009, 2010 and 2011 taxation years were allowed in part to reduce the appellant's taxable income by agreed amounts.

The appellant appealed reassessments for the 2008 to 2012 taxation years that included his net earnings from online poker activities as business income.

The Tax Court of Canada found that the appellant played poker in a non-recreational manner with the subjective intention of making a profit, organizing his life around the game and using objective standards of risk management.

The Court concluded that the appellant was operating a business and using his expertise to earn a living.

The appeal for 2008 was dismissed, while the appeals for 2009 to 2012 were allowed in part to reduce taxable income and allow a business loss, based on a partial consent between the parties.

The appellant appealed reassessments for the 2009, 2010, and 2011 taxation years that included his net poker earnings as business income.

The Tax Court of Canada found that the appellant played poker in a non-recreational manner with the subjective intention to profit, organizing his life around the game and adopting objective standards of risk management.

The Court concluded that the appellant was operating a business and his poker earnings were taxable as business income.

The appeals for 2009 and 2010 were dismissed, while the appeal for 2011 was allowed in part to reduce his taxable income by $279,830 based on a partial consent regarding a specific tournament win.

The appellant, a world champion poker player, appealed reassessments that included his net poker gains as business income for the 2010, 2011, and 2012 taxation years.

The Minister argued that the appellant was carrying on a business through his poker gambling activities.

The Tax Court of Canada applied the Stewart test to determine if the activities were carried on in a sufficiently commercial manner.

After analyzing expert evidence on whether poker is a game of chance or skill, and reviewing the appellant's risk management, training, and profitability, the Court concluded that the poker activities were not conducted in a sufficiently commercial manner to constitute a source of business income.

The appeals were allowed and the reassessments were referred back to the Minister.

The applicant, a citizen of Pakistan and a teacher, sought judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) decision confirming that she had an internal flight alternative (IFA) in Faisalabad, Lahore, and Multan.

She argued that the RAD failed to adequately consider the risk of violence against women and teachers in Pakistan.

The Federal Court found that the RAD reasonably assessed the documentary evidence and properly concluded that the risks she identified were not prevalent in the suggested IFAs.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by an Enforcement Officer denying an administrative stay of a removal order.

The applicant argued the Officer erred in assessing medical evidence regarding her depression, post-traumatic symptoms, and suicidal ideation resulting from prior sexual violence.

The Federal Court found the Officer's decision unreasonable due to insufficient reasons, noting the medical evidence demonstrated peril in returning the applicant to India.

The application for judicial review was granted and the matter remitted for redetermination.

The applicant sought judicial review of an IRCC officer's decision denying her application for restoration of temporary resident status and a work permit.

The applicant's study permit expired and her subsequent application for a post-graduate work permit was refused.

She later filed an application for leave and for judicial review, arguing this suspended the 90-day limitation period to apply for restoration of status.

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, holding that the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations clearly require a restoration application to be made within 90 days of the loss of status, and there is no automatic suspension of this period while pursuing legal proceedings before the Court.

The officer's conclusion that the application was submitted out of time was reasonable.

The applicants, nationals of the Democratic Republic of Congo who previously lived in South Africa, applied for judicial review of the RAD's dismissal of their refugee claim.

The RPD and RAD found the principal applicant's credibility severely undermined and concluded they could safely return to the DRC.

The Court dismissed the application, finding no error in the RAD's forward-looking risk assessment or its application of the "compelling reasons" provision.

The Court declined to certify a question regarding the impact of prior refugee status in a third country due to lack of general importance and evidentiary foundation.

The applicant sought judicial review of a visa officer's refusal of his study permit application.

The officer found the applicant would not leave Canada at the end of his stay due to family ties and inconsistencies in his study plan, concluding the applicant sought to establish himself permanently.

The Federal Court found the decision unreasonable because the officer failed to account for the fact that the applicant already held a valid multiple-entry visitor visa, rendering the logic that he needed a study permit to settle in Canada unintelligible.

The application for judicial review was allowed.