Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19981118


Docket: A-174-94

CORAM:      STRAYER, J.A.

         DÉCARY, J.A.

         LINDEN, J.A.

BETWEEN:

     STEVEN G. LIGHTBURN

     Appellant

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

     Respondent

Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia on November 18, 1998

Judgment delivered at Vancouver, B.C. on November 18, 1998

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:      LINDEN, J.A.


Date: 19981118


Docket: A-174-94

CORAM:      STRAYER, J.A.

         DÉCARY, J.A.

         LINDEN, J.A.

BETWEEN:

     STEVEN G. LIGHTBURN

     Appellant

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

     Respondent

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

     (Delivered orally from the Bench at

     Vancouver, B.C. on November 18, 1998)

LINDEN, J.A.

[1]      We are not persuaded that the Tax Court Judge erred in any way that would permit this Court to intervene.

[2]      The argument raised here about the non-receipt of the Notices of Assessment for 1980, 1981 and 1983, was not shown to have been raised below on the basis of the evidence in the record before this Court. Hence, this argument cannot be raised on appeal. (See Kingsdale Securities v. M.N.R., [1975] C.T.C. 10 (F.C.A.)).

[3]      In any event, the appellant, in his Notice of Appeal to the Tax Court, refers to the content of the Notices of Assessment, their dates and their numbers (1980 - 88418; 1981 - 88419; 1983 - 88421). He seems also to have understood what was in the Assessments even though he claims never to have received them.

[4]      New material produced by the appellant before this Court today, which is not admissible, clearly indicates that, if it was admissible, the above numbers referred to in the Notice of Appeal to the Tax Court correspond exactly to the actual Assessment numbers. Hence, although he has tried to explain it away, he must have received these Notices of Assessment to have been able to refer to their content, dates and numbers.

[5]      The appellant has raised several other technical arguments, none of which were relevant to the Appeal before this Court, none of which were raised before and none of which had any merit.

[6]      This appeal should, therefore, be dismissed with costs.

                             (Sgd.) "A.M. Linden"

                                 J.A.

Vancouver, British Columbia

November 18, 1998

     FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL


Date: 19981118


Docket: A-174-94

BETWEEN:

     STEVEN G. LIGHTBURN

     Appellant

     - and -

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

     Respondent

    

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

    

     FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

     NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DATED:                  November 18, 1998

COURT NO.:              A-174-94

STYLE OF CAUSE:          Steven G. Lightburn

                     v.

                     Her Majesty the Queen

PLACE OF HEARING:          Vancouver, BC

DATE OF HEARING:          November 18, 1998

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LINDEN, J.A.

CONCURRED IN BY:      STRAYER, J.A.

                 DÉCARY, J.A.

APPEARANCES:

     Mr. S.G. Lightburn      on his own behalf

     Ms. Linda Bell          for Respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

     Morris Rosenberg          for Respondent

     Deputy Attorney General

     of Canada


 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.