Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

                                         Date: 19980501

                                         Docket: A-285-97

MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, THE 1st DAY OF MAY 1998

CORAM:      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DENAULT

     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DÉCARY

     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LÉTOURNEAU

BETWEEN:

     J. ADORY LALIBERTÉ,

     GEORGETTE OTIS LALIBERTÉ

     Applicants

     AND:

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

     Respondent

     J U D G M E N T

     The application for judicial review is dismissed.

     Pierre Denault

     J.A.

Certified true translation

Peter Douglas


Date: 19980501


Docket: A-285-97

CORAM:      DENAULT J.A.

         DÉCARY J.A.

         LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

BETWEEN:

     J. ADORY LALIBERTÉ,

     GEORGETTE OTIS LALIBERTÉ

     Applicants

AND:

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

     Respondent

     Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec on Friday, May 1, 1998

     Judgment delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec on Friday, May 1, 1998

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:      LÉTOURNEAU J.A.


Date: 19980501


Dossier: A-285-97

CORAM:      DENAULT J.A.

         DÉCARY J.A.

         LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

BETWEEN:

     J. ADORY LALIBERTÉ,

     GEORGETTE OTIS LALIBERTÉ

     Applicants

AND:

     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

     Respondent

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

     (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec

     on Friday, May 1, 1998)

LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

[1]      This is an application for judicial review by two applicants to quash a decision of Judge Tardif of the Tax Court of Canada. Ultimately, the only issue before us was whether Mrs. Laliberté (the applicant) was entitled to deduct, in respect of 1990, 1991 and 1992, the interest paid on a mortgage loan she took out in 1988 when a rental property belonging to her husband, on which she had a second mortgage, was repossessed.

[2]      The applicant used $20,000 of the amount so borrowed to repay the first mortgage creditor. However, the $20,000 loaned by the first mortgage creditor to the applicant"s husband in 1986 had been borrowed not to produce income, but to pay legal costs in connection with a civil suit unrelated to the rental property. At the time, the applicant had guaranteed her husband"s loan and stood joint and several surety for the borrower in relation to the lender. Thus, in 1988, when the applicant repaid the $20,000 owed to the first mortgage creditor, she released herself from her obligation as guarantor, so the amount was used for personal purposes, not to produce income.

[3]      We are all of the view that the interest deduction claim was rightly refused.

[4]      The financial difficulties experienced by the applicants are unfortunate and it is impossible not to sympathize with them. However, the applicable statutory provisions in the case at bar and their interpretation by the courts leave us, like the Judge of the Tax Court of Canada, with no alternative but to dismiss the applicant"s claim. The application for judicial review will be dismissed.

     Gilles Létourneau

     J.A.

Certified true translation

Peter Douglas

     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     APPEAL DIVISION

     NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

COURT NO.:                  A-285-97

STYLE OF CAUSE:              J. ADORY LALIBERTÉ ET AL. v. THE QUEEN

PLACE OF HEARING:          Montréal

DATE OF HEARING:          May 1, 1998

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

OF THE COURT BY:          Létourneau J.A.

DATED:                  May 1, 1998

APPEARANCES:

J. Adory Laliberté

Georgette Otis Laliberté                          FOR THE APPLICANTS

Marie-Andrée Legault                          FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

J. Adory Laliberté                              FOR THE APPLICANTS

George Thomson

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario                              FOR THE RESPONDENT

 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.