Date: 20060505
BETWEEN:
and
Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on May 4, 2006.
Judgment delivered at Montréal, Quebec, on May 5, 2006.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: DÉCARY J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
Date: 20060505
Docket: A-296-04
Citation: 2006 FCA 166
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAYMOND BÉRUBÉ
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
[1] The appellant was the subject of an assessment of unreported income by the net worth method. He filed his objection in the Tax Court of Canada, where some of his claims were accepted. He is now appealing the decision of the Tax Court of Canada as to the claims that were rejected, in particular regarding clothing, transportation and the amount of cash which he said he had as petty cash.
[2] To begin with, the appellant alleged that the judge made an error in not accepting his arguments on these points. The question is essentially one of credibility which, though it is not entirely outside the Court’s jurisdiction, still remains for obvious reasons, the province of the judge who had the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses. Nothing that was submitted to this Court on this point warrants its intervention in the circumstances.
[3] The appellant also alleged that the judge disregarded the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness by refusing to allow him to proceed with his testimony and to recall the auditor to cross-examine her again. The transcript of the testimony and arguments does not support such an objection.
[4] At no time did the appellant ask the trial judge for leave to reopen the inquiry in order to conduct a second cross-examination of the witness. Accordingly, the judge cannot be blamed for refusing to grant an unstated wish by the appellant of which he could not be aware.
[5] Actually, the transcript showed that the appellant, who represented himself, suffered from some confusion between the quite different stages of argument and filing of evidence, stages which should not be confused precisely for reasons of procedural fairness. As this Court stated in Wagg v. R., 2003 FCA 303, a lack of experience or training in representing oneself in a judicial proceeding entails risks. However, those risks are assumed by the litigant, and thus the unfortunate consequences that may follow, for which the trial judge cannot be blamed.
[6] For these reasons, I would dismiss the appeal with costs.
I concur.
Robert Décary J.A.
I concur.
J.D. Denis Pelletier J.A.
Certified true translation
François Brunet, LLB, BCL
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-296-04
APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT OF JUDGE BRENT PARIS OF THE TAX COURT OF CANADA ON MAY 7, 2004, CASE No. 2000‑1812(IT)G.
STYLE OF CAUSE: RAYMOND BÉRUBÉ v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: Létourneau J.A.
Pelletier J.A.
APPEARANCES:
|
Montréal, Quebec |
FOR THE APPELLANT (himself)
|
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITOR OF RECORD:
|
Deputy Attorney General of Canada |
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
Date: 20060505
Docket: A-296-04
Montréal, Quebec, May 5, 2006
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAYMOND BÉRUBÉ
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
JUDGMENT
The appeal is dismissed with costs.
“Robert Décary”
J.A.
Certified true translation
François Brunet, LLB, BCL