Date: 20011116
Dockets: 2000-5115-EI,
2000-5116-CPP
BETWEEN:
YOUNG UNITED CHURCH,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
AND
2000-4914-EI,
2000-4916-CPP
DON GRICE,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
and
YOUNG UNITED CHURCH,
Intervenor.
Reasonsfor Judgment
Rowe, D.J.T.C.C.
[1] The appellant Young United Church (Young) appeals from a decision issued by the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") on August 1, 2000 pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Employment Insurance Act (the "Act") wherein the Minister confirmed an assessment dated January 19, 2000 - with respect to certain persons named in Appendix A, attached to said decision - on the basis they had been engaged in both insurable and pensionable service with Young for the period January 1 to December 31, 1998. The appellant, Don Grice - a worker named in said decision - was also the recipient of a decision - also dated August 1, 2000 - finding him to have been engaged in insurable and pensionable service with Young during said period. The agent for Young, Grice - appearing on his own behalf - and counsel for the respondent agreed both appeals would be heard on common evidence. In addition, the parties agreed the relevant result in the within appeals would apply to the separate appeals - 2000-5116(CPP) filed by Young - and 2000-4916(CPP) filed by Grice - in response to the relevant decision issued by the Minister pursuant to the Canada Pension Plan. (the "Plan").
[2] The Reply to the Notice of Appeal (Reply) set forth certain individuals - named in the assessment issued to Young - as having performed specific functions and the result was to create categories of workers, although all were found to have been employed - by Young - pursuant to a contract of service. Certain workers - named in paragraph 5 of the Reply - were described as "the musicians". Another worker - Richard Borbridge - was identified as "the student"; Marco Vicente and Margaret Koop were described as "the Section Leader" and "the Choir Director", respectively. The appellant - Don Grice - was referred to as "the Organist".
[3] Margaret Koop testified she is a musician and has resided in Winnipeg, Manitoba since 1998. On December 7, 1997 she entered into a written contract with Young wherein she agreed to provide her services as Choir Director. The term of the contract was for the period from September 1, 1997 to June 30, 1998 and she agreed to provide her services in return to a fee in the sum of $5,225.00 to be paid in 10 monthly installments of $525.50. Koop stated she was a professional musician and earned revenue as a result of providing services to other individuals or entities pursuant to contractual arrangements. In terms of her income in 1998 - derived exclusively from her occupation as a musician - Koop estimated her contract with Young was the source of between 18% and 22% of the total revenue and the provision of those services had occupied 25% of her working time. As part of her duties as Choir Director, she hired - as her assistants - a Section Leader and a junior Choir Director. She recruited persons that might be suitable for this type of work, conducted the requisite interviews and then hired workers and established their remuneration. She also had authority to discharge workers fulfilling these roles. The workers were paid in the form of cheques issued by Young, as requisitioned by Koop. Her own services were not supervised by anyone at Young and her operating budget was established on an annual basis following a meeting with the Chair of the Personnel Committee. The amount of remuneration established in the contract was the subject of negotiation as - during the course of her career - she had provided a similar service to other churches. Koop stated that she is a choral conductor and utilizes her hands, face, body and voice as instruments or tools. In addition, she owns a piano, keyboard, metronome, photocopier, fax, a computer with specific software, as well as the usual equipment and supplies within an office located in her own residence. Koop stated she was responsible for the cost of acquisition and maintenance of these items. In order to fulfill her contract with Young, Koop stated she devoted 15-20 hours per week - depending on the season - to that task but she decided the amount of time to be spent and arranged her own schedule. Major events had to be the subject of advance planning and could occupy 5 hours of her time in the weeks leading up to the performance. The balance of working time - expended in the course of carrying out her duties as Choir Director - was devoted to research - up to 1.5 hours - and she had to undertake appropriate exercises to maintain her voice. She usually studied musical scores for 5.0 hours and dedicated another one to three hours per week to consultations with other professionals. The supervision of the musicians and the conduct of rehearsals with the choir and soloists occupied three hours. She also practiced conducting in front of a mirror, paying particular attention to difficult portions of the score. Each performance of the choir lasted only 15 minutes and, if she performed at a Sunday service, that would occupy another 15 minutes. All the planning for performances by the choir were done at her home office using her own equipment and materials. She owned numerous choral scores as part of her own specialized library. Although she has a studio in her own home which is used for various purposes, training for the choir was undertaken at the Young church premises in accordance with her own decision as to the time and duration of the rehearsal and the manner in which it would be carried out. Some consultations with other music professionals were held at her own home and she determined the length of the performance in consultation with the Young Minister and the Organist. The actual performances of the choir were held during the worship service in the church. During the period from September 1, 1997 to the beginning of June, 1998, she provided her services as Choir Director every Sunday except for two weeks following Christmas and New Year but - during June - the choir did not perform every week. Up to and including Christmas day, there would be several performances held at Young. The same procedure was followed for the Easter celebrations. Koop stated that her sources of income - apart from Young - were derived from performing as a singer and from conducting another choir, although - in 1998 - her revenue from personal performances was not particularly significant. Koop stated she has been involved in the pursuit of her specialized profession for 30 years and - in her opinion - must strive to maintain a high standard of work since the quality of the sound produced by a choir is important in order to be fully appreciated by an audience and she is aware that a large part of her work is derived from word of mouth recommendations.
[4] In cross-examination by counsel for the respondent, Margaret Koop stated she was the only Choir Director at Young during the relevant period. Although not required to do so pursuant to her contract, she chose to develop the children's music program. She was referred to the contract dated December 7, 1997 - Exhibit R-1 - and agreed there was a 30-day cancellation clause. She stated she did not advise the Young Minister if she were to be absent from a particular Sunday service and, in the event she could not find a replacement to conduct a rehearsal, would merely cancel it and reschedule. Koop agreed her duties were set out in clause 7 of her contract and had been included therein as a consequence of her suggestions since she was experienced in that field. At paragraph 3 of said contract, there was reference to an entitlement by Koop - as Choir Director - to two weeks sick leave but it was expressed therein as "sick leave" and - pursuant to paragraph 4 - she was required to pay any qualified substitute if she were to be absent on a particular Sunday. However, the contract - Exhibit R-1 - did not stipulate any set number of Sunday performances within the period from September 1, 1997 to June 30,1998, and Koop does not recall having signed another contract in relation to her continued provision of services as Choir Director in subsequent years. Koop stated no one at Young ever gave her any specific instructions or directions to perform any special piece of music. She was required to find - and remunerate - any substitutes retained to conduct rehearsals. On occasion, she chose to hire a replacement because she was either performing services for another client or on vacation.
[5] Don Grice testified he resides in Winnipeg and is a professional organist. He holds a Bachelor of Music and is an Associate of Royal Canadian College of Organists. During 1998, he was employed at a music store in Winnipeg - 40 hours a week - but also provided his services - as an organist - to Young. In the course of preparing for the Sunday service, he would participate in the selection of appropriate hymns - in consultation with the Young Minister and the Choir Director (Margaret Koop) - and plan his performance, a process requiring two hours of preparation followed by 4 hours of practice and rehearsal. He chose all other music to be used as preludes, offertory hymns and closing pieces. Grice stated the bulk of his time was spent on organ repertoire but choir rehearsal still occupied between one and two hours per week even though the Sunday worship service lasted one hour. In addition, he was involved in upgrading his own skills as an organist. He was responsible for the maintenance of the organ and accompanied the choir at rehearsals and during performances, including those by any soloist. He chose the technicians to service the organ and piano, negotiated the fee to be paid to the local piano tuner and handled the administration of the payment - by Young - to the company from Québec for servicing the 29-stop pipe organ which had been manufactured there in 1993. Grice stated he owned several hundred books of music specifically written for the organ and accessed them in relation to providing his services to Young. He also utilized his reference library in order to write an explanation of a certain piece of music for inclusion in the church newsletter. Since playing organ music involves both hands and both feet, he was required to make decisions in advance concerning the use of certain stops and these were recorded on the score. The organ had the capacity to store - into memory - additions of registers and stops so they could be recalled during performance of a piece. On occasion, Grice was responsible for finding suitable organ music to accompany certain soloists who may have been performing on various instruments. Grice stated he was solely responsible for making all decisions concerning preparation, study, training and practicing - not only as to time and duration - but also pertaining to methods employed. He is accustomed to performing on various organs located in different churches in the city of Winnipeg and also used one or more of these instruments in order to practice. If the particular choice of music did not have a component requiring the use of a pedal, he was able to practice on a piano. All access to the pipe organ at Young was controlled by him because it is a large, expensive and complex system requiring special knowledge in order to perform on it. At his home, he had a studio and office and this space was used for planning and storing books and materials. Some reference material taken to Young - by Grice - was used and stored there during 1998 but all items were owned by him. In 1998, he attended a convention in Denver, Colorado and also traveled to Chicago, Illinois for private lessons and paid the cost of these trips even though the experience and knowledge acquired pertained to his work as an organist at Young. Grice stated he considered his tools to be composed of his special skills, extensive organ library, metronome, computer and software for cataloguing music, office supplies and special shoes - with very thin soles - for playing the organ. During 1998, he had contracts with other churches and estimated his revenue - from Young - amounted to approximately 40% of his income derived from working as a professional organist but - overall - amounted to only 15% of his total income. Apart from working 40 hours a week at the music store, Grice worked an additional 25 hours per week as a professional organist. He performed at other churches in Winnipeg for weddings, funerals and special concerts during the week. In the event a replacement was required for the Sunday service at Young, Grice stated he would locate a qualified person and was responsible for payment to that individual. However, that task was not particularly onerous since he was acquainted with most of the professional organists in Winnipeg. When he was able to use parts of the same repertoire at more than one function, it would reduce his practice time. He noted that, as a professional organist, he obtains work as a consequence of his reputation throughout the community and his popularity is based on the response - by the public - to his performances. As a result, he is acutely aware that each time he plays, his reputation is at stake. Therefore, adequate preparation is extremely important since the organ is a powerful - but unforgiving - instrument in the sense that errors will be very obvious to the listener. Grice stated he had already begun his musical career as a student of piano but later on decided to study the organ while pursuing his degree at university.
[6] In cross-examination by counsel for the respondent, the appellant - Don Grice - identified the contract - Exhibit R-2 - that he had signed on December 8, 1998. In return for providing his services - as a professional organist - to Young for the 12-month period from September 1, 1997 to August 31, 1998, Grice agreed to accept a fee in the sum of $5,255.00 to be paid in 12 monthly instalments. He agreed the hymns for the Sunday worship service were chosen in consultation with the Young Minister and Margaret Koop. Pursuant to paragraph 9 of the contract, details pertaining to the provision of his services at most weddings and funerals to be held at Young were set forth including the establishment of a minimum fee in the sum of $85.00 which the users of the service paid directly to Grice. In addition, Young agreed no other organist could perform at Young without the approval of Grice. Grice pointed out that - according to paragraph 5 of the contract - he was obliged to ensure that any replacement was suitably qualified and payment to that person was his responsibility. He was entitled to a two-week period described as "sick leave" without the loss of remuneration. At paragraph 3, the contract stated, "As Young currently participates in a process of sharing summer services with another local congregation, it is assumed the Organist will take holidays during the month of Young's summer break". Grice stated that he was considered - by virtue of paragraph 6 of the contract - to be an ex officio member of the Worship and Music Committee but he was not a member of the congregation at Young. Grice stated the weddings were arranged through the office of the Young Minister even though he was paid directly by the recipient of the service.
[7] Linda Hodges-Murray testified she was ordained as a Minister of the United Church of Canada - in 1978 - and has been employed by Young since July, 1998. At Young, she performs a variety of duties and responsibilities including the management of a working relationship between Young, Hope Mennonite church and other groups for the purpose of sharing a common premise within a building located in the inner city. She explained there are 6 partners in the building, including a subsidiary ministry of Young, a youth outreach program operated through United Way, a day nursery and a housing project for severely ill persons. She stated the worship service on each Sunday is one hour in duration and there is a one to three hour period of fellowship following the conclusion of worship. Hodges-Murray stated she worked approximately 50 hours per week, of which 10 hours are devoted to the Sunday morning worship service. About 20 hours are dedicated to pastoral care including home and hospital visits and grief and crisis counseling. Young employs a full-time office administrator, two full-time outreach workers, one full-time and one part-time custodian, a part-time building manager, a full-time director of the nursery and between 8 and 10 nursery workers. In addition, Young receives assistance from a corps of nearly 100 volunteers who attend at Young - during the course of any given week - in order to help deliver a variety of programs to the designated users. Young also operates an active Sunday school program, adult bible study groups and includes various committees within its administrative structure. The complex shared by Young with the other groups also has additional space that is leased to other organizations.
[8] In cross-examination by counsel for the respondent, Linda Hodges-Murray stated she was not involved in any discussions between Young and Grice and/or Koop. She agreed the provision of music was an important and significant component of the worship service but it occupied less than 50% of the total time allotted to that period. She stated she had operated on the basis that the Organist (Grice) and the Choir Director (Koop) would either be present when required or would have provided for a suitable replacement as she was not qualified to undertake that task.
[9] Bruce Gammon, the agent for the appellant submitted the facts in the within appeal were unique to the particular nature of the work performed by the workers and pointed out that the tools used were specific to the task since Koop and Grice were both highly-qualified professional musicians generating revenue by providing their talent to various clients within the course of a business. In that sense, the agent pointed to the relatively small percentage of overall revenue derived by both of them as a result of their working relationship with Young. He also submitted the evidence clearly demonstrated their services were not integral to the multi-faceted operations of Young and they had conducted themselves in a manner consistent with the wording of their individual contract - with Young - which clearly spelled out - both in wording and intent - that they were to be independent contractors.
[10] Counsel for the respondent submitted the evidence supported the view taken by the Minister that the provision of organ music to the worship service was integral and the primary tool - the massive pipe-organ - was provided by Young. Counsel pointed out that no evidence had been presented by Young - or Grice - to demonstrate the Minister had been incorrect in assessing the other worker(s) within the categories earlier described as "the student", "the section leader" and/or "the musicians" and, as a result, the decision by the Minister to confirm the earlier assessments in relation to those persons must remain in force.
[11] In Wiebe Door Services Ltd. v. M.N.R., [1986] 2 C.T.C. 200, the Federal Court of Appeal approved subjecting the evidence to the following tests, with the admonition that the tests be regarded as a four-in-one test with emphasis on the combined force of the whole scheme of operations. The tests are:
1. The Control Test
2. Ownership of Tools
3. Chance of Profit and Risk of Loss
4. The integration test
Control:
[12] There was very little control exercised - by Young - in relation to the services provided by either Grice or Koop. They were both professional musicians and were further specialized within that discipline; Koop was an experienced director of choirs and Grice was a professional organist. Each of them was able to obtain a qualified substitute - if and when deemed necessary - and, because they had the specific ability to perform that task, were unfettered in that process. However, they were responsible for the remuneration of any person providing service on their behalf. Both Koop and Grice consulted Hodges-Murray or - prior to her arrival at Young - discussed the choice of hymns with the previous Young Minister in charge of the Sunday worship service. However, all the other music performed during the course of the service was chosen - and performed - by Grice in accordance with his professional judgment. The rehearsals by the choir and soloists were arranged for by Koop and conducted as she saw fit. Much of the planning for the performances by the choir was carried out by Koop from her own in-home office. The duties of each were set out in the relevant contract and - in my view - were designed to accomplish certain specified results without recitation of particular methods to be utilized in achieving those goals. When a professional, possessing specialized skills, is hired to provide a service, often the payor has no means by which to actually supervise or control the manner in which the work is done but still remains able to dictate when and where and during what time-frame the work will be performed, perhaps within the framework of a workplace policy. No such indicia of control was present in the within appeals as it applied to either Koop or Grice and any matters tending toward that interpretation were more attributable to participation in planning - by consensus - rather than from responding to directions issued by a master. Obviously, if one contracts with another to provide music or flowers or books for a Sunday worship service, then it is vital to the performance of the agreement that the relevant item or service is actually provided and delivered - on Sunday - during the service.
Tools:
[13] Margaret Koop - the Choir Director - utilized her hands, body and voice as tools in order to carry out her work. She also owned a substantial amount of equipment and an elaborate collection of choral scores as part of a body of reference material and she operated from an office - equipped with a studio - in her own home. Of course, the premises were provided by Young in order that rehearsals could be held and - usually - a church service is held inside a church and a choir sings from a location designated within that space.
[14] Don Grice was an organist and played the large pipe organ installed inside the church. Unlike bagpipes, it tends not to be portable and Grice - when providing his services to Young for the one-hour-per-week worship service - certainly used that tool. However, his evidence was that he used his own equipment and tools - including a computer equipped with special software - at his own in-home office in order to prepare for the delivery of the service. In addition, he provided - to Young - his own scores and reference material - pertaining to organ music. Young - pursuant to the contract - in effect, designated Grice as the person responsible for controlling access to the organ and for its maintenance and repair. In return, he was granted permission to use both the organ and the piano for practice and - importantly - for instruction at such times when it would not adversely affect other church activities.
Chance of profit and risk of loss:
[15] Margaret Koop maintained an office and purchased supplies and musical scores. She entered into a contractual arrangement with Young and agreed to provide the services attributable to a Choir Director after negotiating the terms thereof, including the fee. She testified she had - on occasion - made the choice to hire and pay a substitute to carry out some of her duties at Young because she had been performing another service for another client at the time. That is the sort of choice made - regularly - by persons providing professional services - on their own account - in the course of a business or practice. As a professional of nearly 30 years standing, she had different clients and derived the bulk of her income from other sources since only 20% of her revenue flowed from the contract with Young. She was required to juggle her commitments in order to carry out the terms of the agreement and would be required to ensure that expenses relating to the production of work were reasonably in balance as against revenue to be gained.
[16] Don Grice also maintained an office and purchased supplies and specialized computer software and related equipment including special shoes. He worked - fulltime - in a music store and estimated only 15% of his annual income was obtained from providing his services to Young. In the course of his profession as an organist, he played for weddings, funerals, concerts and at other functions held at Young and/or at other facilities in Winnipeg. Again, he negotiated the fee he wanted to be paid in return for providing the services described in the contract - Exhibit R-2. In so doing, he obviously weighed the requirement to dedicate a sufficient amount of working time to Young against the amount of remuneration to be gained. He paid for his own trips to a convention and for private lessons even though the instruction related directly to the performance of his services to Young.
Integration:
[17] In the case of David T. McDonald Company Ltd. v. M.N.R., 92 DTC 1917, Mogan T.C.C.J. heard an appeal under the Income Tax Act in which the status of the appellant became an important issue. The question arose whether the taxpayer was an employee or an independent contractor while carrying out his duties as the sole and exclusive sales and marketing manager for a footwear company. Judge Mogan found the taxpayer kept his own time schedule and attended at the office of the footwear company for a few hours two to four days per week when he was not spending his winters in Florida. Judge Mogan also found the taxpayer did not participate in any medical or pension plan and was not subject to corporate policy concerning retirement age. At page 1922 and following of his judgment, Judge Mogan stated:
"Counsel for both parties relied on the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Wiebe Door Services Ltd. v. M.N.R., 87 DTC 5025 which laid down certain guidelines to determine whether an individual is an employee or an independent contractor. MacGuigan J. writing for the Court held at page 5029 that Lord Wright's test in the Montreal Locomotive Works case (control, ownership of tools, chance of profit, risk of loss) was not really a fourfold test but a four-in-one test requiring an overview of the combined force of the whole scheme of operations. It is useful to apply the four-in-one test to Mr. McDonald in 1985 and 1986 as if the Appellant corporation did not exist. He was not under the control of any senior officer of Status Canada. His tools were his experience, knowledge and goodwill in the shoe business in Canada. He had a chance of profit in the sense that he shared the fortunes of Status Canada through his commission and profit sharing arrangement as set out in paragraph 5 of the agreement. Also, the Appellant could earn a profit from the wholesale business it carried on with small retailers. Although Mr. McDonald did not have a risk of loss in a direct sense, the agreement (paragraph 6) was subject to termination on 30 days' notice if gross sales were less than $1,000,000 in any one year. It is significant to me that this condition for termination in paragraph 6 was dependent on the overall performance of Status Canada (its gross annual sales) and not dependent on the personal performance of Mr. McDonald like a commission salesman with his own minimum sales quota for each year. Even if he had no risk of loss, the concept of a four-in-one test requiring an overview of the whole scheme means that any one of the four indicators may point toward employment but, considering the whole relationship between the Appellant and Status Canada, the four indicators taken together may point more toward an independent contractor and less toward employment.
In Wiebe Door, MacGuigan, J. cited with approval at page 5030 the Market Investigations case in which the question is asked: "Is the person who has engaged himself to perform these services performing them as a person in business on his own account?" To answer that question, one must consider whether the person has the capacity to engage in the particular business on his own account. If he has experience, knowledge and goodwill in the business, it is easier to conclude that he has the capacity to engage in the business on his own account and that he is not simply an incorporated employee. This is particularly true when the person has no prior employment connection with the party who benefits from his services. But if he has no experience, knowledge or goodwill in the business and offers only personal skills not related to the business, it is more difficult to conclude that he has the capacity to engage in the business on his own account; and it would probably be more reasonable to regard him as an employee of the party who benefits from his services.
[18] Margaret Koop - as discussed earlier - was a professional carrying on business within her particular discipline as a musician and was not integrated into the extensive operations of Young as described by Reverend Hodges-Murray. The work performed by Koop - while important to the enjoyment of regularly-scheduled worship services and special events such as Thanksgiving, Christmas celebrations and Easter - constituted less than 50% of the time designated for the Sunday service and the time devoted to the conduct of that period of worship occupied only one-fifth of the total hours worked each week by Hodges-Murray. Young was a partner in a building complex and a landlord to other groups. It operated a day nursery and provided other services in conjunction with its partners. The services of Koop were only an accessory to the overall functions of Young as a multi-faceted organization. Koop was in the business of providing choral direction and related services to various persons and Young utilized her services to enhance its own worship services but it was not engaged in that business, per se.
[19] Don Grice was also a professional musician who chose to earn revenue - in addition to his full-time employment at a music store - by holding himself out as a specialized performer. He chose to provide his services to Young for a set period at a negotiated fee. He had other sources of income and organized his activities accordingly. He regarded himself as someone carrying on business - on his own account - as a professional musician. Young relied on his own expertise not only when performing in church but also when undertaking responsibility for controlling use of the organ by others and in making arrangements concerning repair and maintenance of that instrument. However, it must be noted that the provision of organ music to parishioners was not the principal business of Young.
[20] In the case of Minister of National Revenue v. Emily Standing, [1992] F.C.J. No. 890 Stone, J.A. stated:
...There is no foundation in the case law for the proposition that such a relationship may exist merely because the parties choose to describe it to be so regardless of the surrounding circumstances when weighed in the light of the Wiebe Door test ...
[21] In the within appeals, both Grice and Koop conducted themselves in accordance with the terms of their contracts. There was no substantial departure from what was written in the agreement and what was actually done, as is often the case in this type of appeal. Throughout, the parties dealt with each other in a manner consistent with dealings between a payor and an independent contractor providing service within the context of a business.
[22] As pointed out by counsel for the respondent, there was no evidence produced by either appellant which was capable of challenging the assumptions of fact - relied on by the Minister when issuing the decision confirming the assessment of January 19, 2000 issued pursuant to the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Pension Plan - as it pertained to the workers earlier described as "the student", (Richard Borbridge), "the Section Leader" (Marco Vincente) and those listed - at paragraph 5 of the Reply - as "the musicians" including - again - Richard Borbridge. As a result, the decision in respect of these persons will remain unchanged.
[23] Having regard to all of the evidence and applying it in the manner directed by the Federal Court of Appeal in Wiebe, supra, the appeal of Young is hereby allowed and the assessment is referred back to the Minister for reconsideration and reassessment on the basis that Margaret Koop and Don Grice be deleted therefrom because they were not employed in insurable employment with Young United Church during the relevant period.
[24] The appeal of Don Grice is hereby allowed and the decision of the Minister is varied to find:
Don Grice was not employed in insurable employment with Young United Church during the period from January 1 to December 31, 1998.
[25] As agreed by the parties at the outset, the above results apply to the appeals filed by Young - 2000-5116(CPP) and Grice - 2000-4916(CPP) filed pursuant to the Plan.
[26] Therefore, with respect to the appeal by Young, it is hereby allowed and the assessment is referred back to the Minister for reconsideration and reassessment on the basis that Margaret Koop and Donald Grice be deleted therefrom because they were not employed in pensionable employment with Young United Church during the relevant period.
[27] The appeal by Grice is also allowed and the decision of the Minister is varied to find:
[28] Don Grice was not employed in pensionable employment with Young United Church during the period from January 1 to December 31, 1998.
Signed at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 16th day of November 2001.
"D.W. Rowe"
D.J.T.C.C.
COURT FILE NO.: 2000-4914(EI)
STYLE OF CAUSE: Don Grice and M.N.R. and
Young United Church
PLACE OF HEARING: Winnipeg, Manitoba
DATE OF HEARING: September 12, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF JUDGMENT: November 16, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: The Appellant himself
For the Respondent: Tanit Gilliam (Student-at-Law)
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the Appellant:
Name:
Firm:
For the Respondent: Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE NO.: 2000-4916(CPP)
STYLE OF CAUSE: Don Grice and M.N.R. and
Young United Church
PLACE OF HEARING: Winnipeg, Manitoba
DATE OF HEARING: September 12, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF JUDGMENT: November 16, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: The Appellant himself
For the Respondent: Tanit Gilliam (Student-at-Law)
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the Appellant:
Name:
Firm:
For the Respondent: Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE NO.: 2000-5115(EI)
STYLE OF CAUSE: Young United Church and M.N.R.
PLACE OF HEARING: Winnipeg, Manitoba
DATE OF HEARING: September 12, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF JUDGMENT: November 16, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Agents for the Appellant: Susan Wilkes
Bruce Gammon
For the Respondent: Tanit Gilliam (Student-at-Law)
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the Appellant:
Name:
Firm:
For the Respondent: Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, CanadaCOURT FILE NO.: 2000-5116(CPP)
STYLE OF CAUSE: Young United Church and M.N.R.
PLACE OF HEARING: Winnipeg, Manitoba
DATE OF HEARING: September 12, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
DATE OF JUDGMENT: November 16, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Agents for the Appellant: Susan Wilkes
Bruce Gammon
For the Respondent: Tanit Gilliam (Student-at-Law)
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the Appellant:
Name:
Firm:
For the Respondent: Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Canada
2000-4914(EI)
BETWEEN:
DON GRICE,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
and
YOUNG UNITED CHURCH,
Intervenor,
Appeal heard on September 12, 2001 at Winnipeg, Manitoba, by
the Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
Appearances
For the Appellant: The Appellant himself
For the Respondent: Tanit Gilliam (Student-at-law)
Agents for the Intervenor: Susan Wilkes
Bruce Gammon
JUDGMENT
The appeal is allowed and the decision of the Minister is varied in accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 16th day of November 2001.
|
"D.W. Rowe" |
D.J.T.C.C.
2000-4916(CPP)
BETWEEN:
DON GRICE,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
and
YOUNG UNITED CHURCH,
Intervenor,
Appeal heard on September 12, 2001 at Winnipeg, Manitoba, by
the Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
Appearances
For the Appellant: The Appellant himself
For the Respondent: Tanit Gilliam (Student-at-law)
Agents for the Intervenor: Susan Wilkes
Bruce Gammon
JUDGMENT
The appeal is allowed and the decision of the Minister is varied in accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 16th day of November 2001.
|
"D.W. Rowe" |
D.J.T.C.C.
2000-5115(EI)
BETWEEN:
YOUNG UNITED CHURCH,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
Appeal heard on September 12, 2001 at Winnipeg, Manitoba, by
the Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
Appearances
Agents for the Appellant: Susan Wilkes
Bruce Gammon
For the Respondent: Tanit Gilliam (Student-at-law)
JUDGMENT
The appeal is allowed and the assessment is referred back to the Minister for reconsideration and reassessment in accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 16th day of November 2001.
|
"D.W. Rowe" |
D.J.T.C.C.
2000-5116(CPP)
BETWEEN:
YOUNG UNITED CHURCH,
Appellant,
and
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
Respondent,
Appeal heard on September 12, 2001 at Winnipeg, Manitoba, by
the Honourable Deputy Judge D.W. Rowe
Appearances
Agents for the Appellant: Susan Wilkes
Bruce Gammon
For the Respondent: Tanit Gilliam (Student-at-law)
JUDGMENT
The appeal is allowed and the assessment is referred back to the Minister in accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 16th day of November 2001.
|
"D.W. Rowe" |
D.J.T.C.C.