Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

     Date: 20000612

     Docket: A-510-98

CORAM:      THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DESJARDINS

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LÉTOURNEAU

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NOËL

BETWEEN:

CONCIERGERIE MICHEL JOBIN

(CMJ) INC.

Applicant


- AND -


THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE


Respondent


- AND -


LILIANE GAGNÉ


Intervenor




Docket: A-511-98

BETWEEN:

CONCIERGERIE MICHEL JOBIN

(CMJ) INC.

Applicant


- AND -


THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE


Respondent


- AND -


SERGE JOBIN

Intervenor


Hearing held in Québec, Quebec, Monday, June 12, 2000

Judgment rendered in Québec, Quebec, Monday, June 12, 2000




REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:      DESJARDINS J.A.





Date: 20000612

     Docket: A-510-98

CORAM:      THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DESJARDINS

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LÉTOURNEAU

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NOËL

BETWEEN:

CONCIERGERIE MICHEL JOBIN

(CMJ) INC.

Applicant


- AND -


THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE


Respondent


- AND -


LILIANE GAGNÉ


Intervenor




Docket: A-511-98

BETWEEN:

CONCIERGERIE MICHEL JOBIN

(CMJ) INC.

Applicant


- AND -


THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE


Respondent


- AND -


SERGE JOBIN

Intervenor

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Pronounced at the hearing in Québec, Quebec

Monday, June 12, 2000)


DESJARDINS J.A.


[1]      This judgment applies in both cases A-510-98 and A-511-98, since these two applications for judicial review were heard simultaneously.

[2]      Notwithstanding the excellent submissions made to us by Ms. Lapierre, we have been unable to find in the judgments of the Tax Court of Canada any of the errors cited by the applicant and the intervenors in relation to the application of subparagraph 3(2)(c)(ii) of the Unemployment Insurance Act.1

[3]      The deputy judge of the Tax Court of Canada, after hearing the evidence, concluded that the facts on which the Minister had relied in his reply to the notice of appeal had not been refuted. Furthermore, the deputy judge held, the Minister had considered all of the relevant circumstances, as he was required to do under the case law of our Court.2

[4]      Consequently, there is no reason to intervene.


[5]      The two applications for judicial review will therefore be dismissed, with costs in only one of the two proceedings.


     Alice Desjardins
     J.A.

Certified true translation

Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L., Trad. a.

     FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL


Date: 20000612

     Docket: A-510-98

BETWEEN:

CONCIERGERIE MICHEL JOBIN

(CMJ) INC.

Applicant

- AND -

THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE


Respondent

- AND -

LILIANE GAGNÉ


Intervenor




Docket: A-511-98

BETWEEN:

CONCIERGERIE MICHEL JOBIN

(CMJ) INC.

Applicant

- AND -

THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE


Respondent

- AND -

SERGE JOBIN

Intervenor





REASONS FOR JUDGMENT




FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
APPEAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD


FILE NO:A-510-98 and A-511-98
STYLE:
CONCIERGERIE MICHEL JOBIN
(CMJ) INC.
Applicant
- AND -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Respondent
- AND -
LILIANE GAGNÉ
Intervenor


Docket: A-511-98
BETWEEN:
CONCIERGERIE MICHEL JOBIN
(CMJ) INC.
Applicant
- AND -
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Respondent
- AND -
SERGE JOBIN
Intervenor
PLACE OF HEARING:Québec, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING:June 12, 2000

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

DATED:              June 12, 2000

APPEARANCES:
Vicky Lapierre                      for the applicant
Roger Roy                          for the respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada              for the applicant
DESROSIERS, RICARD
and LAPIERRE, advocates
Montréal, Quebec                      for the respondent
__________________

1 R.S.C. 1985, c. U-1.

2 Attorney General of Canada v. Jencan Ltd. (June 24, 1997), A-599-96 (F.C.A.)      Francine Légaré v. The Minister of National Revenue (May 28, 1999), A-392-98 (F.C.A.)      Lyne Pérusse v. The Minister of National Revenue (March 10, 2000), A-722-97 (F.C.A.)

 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.