Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20190625


Docket: A-171-16

Citation: 2019 FCA 191

CORAM:

GAUTHIER J.A.

STRATAS J.A.

LASKIN J.A.

 

 

BETWEEN:

MICHAEL DAVIES

Appellant

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on June 25, 2019.

Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on June 25, 2019.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:

STRATAS J.A.

 


Date: 20190625


Docket: A-171-16

Citation: 2019 FCA 191

CORAM:

GAUTHIER J.A.

STRATAS J.A.

LASKIN J.A.

 

 

BETWEEN:

MICHAEL DAVIES

Appellant

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on June 25, 2019).

STRATAS J.A.

[1]  The appellant appeals from the order dated February 6, 2016 of the Tax Court of Canada (per Bocock J.): 2016 TCC 104.

[2]  The Tax Court did not err in law or commit any palpable and overriding error. Indeed, we substantially agree with the findings of law and mixed fact and law in the reasons of the Tax Court.

[3]  Therefore, we will dismiss the appeal with costs fixed by agreement in the amount of $2,500, all-inclusive.

"David Stratas"

J.A.

 


FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD


Docket:

A-171-16

APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.S. BOCOCK DATED APRIL 27, 2016, DOCKET NOS. 2010-3571(IT)G AND 2014-2450(IT)G

STYLE OF CAUSE:

MICHAEL DAVIES v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

 

 

PLACE OF HEARING:

Toronto, Ontario

 

DATE OF HEARING:

June 25, 2019

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:

GAUTHIER J.A.

STRATAS J.A.

LASKIN J.A.

 

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:

STRATAS J.A.

APPEARANCES:

Arthur Birnbaum

 

FOR THE APPELLANT

 

Carol Calabrese

For The Respondent

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Birnbaum Law

Barrister and Solicitor

 

For The Appellant

 

Nathalie G. Drouin

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

 

For The Respondent

 

Nathalie G. Drouin

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

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.