A-147-97
A-178-97
A-205-97
CORAM: HUGESSEN J.A.
DÉCARY J.A.
McDONALD J.A.
B E T W E E N :
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant
- and -
GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED
Respondent
Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, Monday, April 7, 1997.
Judgment rendered from the Bench, April 7, 1997.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
DELIVERED BY: HUGESSEN J.A.
A-147-97
A-178-97
A-205-97
CORAM: HUGESSEN J.A.
DÉCARY J.A.
McDONALD J.A.
B E T W E E N :
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant
- and -
GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario,
Monday, April 7, 1997)
HUGESSEN J.A.
We are all of the view that these three appeals, which all involve the exercise of discretion by the Tax Court judge, are wholly without merit.
The first appeal, file A-147-97, is from an order refusing leave to amend the Crown's reply to the Notice of Appeal. That leave was sought just two months prior to the date fixed for trial in the Tax Court, April 14, 1997. The proposed amendment seeks to add an allegation to the effect that the person, a Mr. Shapiro, through whose activities the taxpayer bought certain seismic data which then formed the basis for a claimed deduction for Canadian Exploration Expenses, had engaged in similar activities (described by Crown counsel as tax scams) with other taxpayers. The Tax Court judge was of the view that this allegation was irrelevant and, if allowed, would broaden the litigation beyond all reason. Manifestly, he was right.
The other two appeals (file A-178-97and A-205-97) are from orders by which the Tax Court judge denied an adjournment of the trial and a stay of the order setting the case down. The principal ground alleged was the pending proposed amendment. That has now been disposed of. In addition, there is material in this record which would support an inference that the Crown has, for some months now, been seeking to delay this matter. We should not interfere with the judge's exercise of discretion.
The appeals will be dismissed. Counsel may now speak to costs.
(Later) The respondent seeks costs on a solicitor and client basis. While the total absence of merit makes the appeals border on the frivolous, we do not think that there is that degree of misconduct which would justify such an award. On the other hand, we think there should be a substantial increase over what could normally be had by way of party and party costs in an interlocutory appeal. We fix such costs, for all three appeals combined, at $3,500.00 plus disbursements including travelling and living expenses for counsel for the hearing of the appeal in Ottawa.
"James K. Hugessen"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
A-147-97
A-178-97
A-205-97
B E T W E E N :
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Appellant
- and -
GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT