London Life, Compagnie d'assurance-vie v. Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FC 956

JudgePinard, J.
CourtFederal Court (Canada)
Case DateSeptember 16, 2009
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations2009 FC 956;(2009), 377 F.T.R. 8 (FC)

London Life v. Can. (A.G.) (2009), 377 F.T.R. 8 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] F.T.R. TBEd. OC.039

London Life - Compagnie d'assurance-vie, 630 Boulevard René-Lévesque West, Suite 1900 Montreal, Quebec H3B 4J5 (applicant) v. Attorney General of Canada and The Minister of National Revenue (respondents)

(T-1224-07; 2009 FC 956)

Indexed As: London Life, Compagnie d'assurance-vie v. Canada (Attorney General)

Federal Court

Pinard, J.

October 20, 2009.

Summary:

London Life applied for judicial review to quash a requirement for information issued by the Minister of National Revenue under s. 231.2 of the Income Tax Act (Can.).

The Federal Court dismissed the application.

Income Tax - Topic 9255

Enforcement - Production of information - Demand of information - General - The Federal Court found no basis for the claim that the Minister of National Revenue had an obligation to prove that the issuance of a requirement for information under s. 231.2 of the Income Tax Act was a reasonable exercise of its power under the Act - See paragraphs 25 to 28.

Income Tax - Topic 9258

Enforcement - Production of information - Demand of information - Respecting unnamed persons - The Minister issued to London Life a requirement for information under s. 231.2 of the Income Tax Act (Can.), in respect of the application of the Act to Ghattas, a London Life commission salesman who was being audited by the Minister - The requirement asked for (a) a copy of the life insurance policies that corresponded to the policy numbers and the names of the payors and insured listed in an appendix to the requirement, and (b) a detailed list of all payments made in respect of those policies, including the name of the beneficiaries - At issue was whether the Minister needed a judicial authorization under s. 231.2(2) to proceed with the requirement for information - The Federal Court held that judicial authorization was not required where the taxpayer (Ghattas), the third party (London Life) and the policy holders were identified - In addition, even if the requirement had related to "unnamed" insured and beneficiaries, judicial authorization was still not required because these "unnamed persons" were not under audit - See paragraphs 1 to 24.

Cases Noticed:

Minister of National Revenue v. Toronto-Dominion Bank (2004), 253 F.T.R. 90; 2004 FC 169, affd. (2004), 332 N.R. 70; 2004 FCA 359, consd. [para. 14].

R. v. McKinlay Transport Ltd. and C.T. Transport Inc., [1990] 1 S.C.R. 627; 106 N.R. 385; 39 O.A.C. 385, consd. [para. 15].

Redeemer Foundation v. Minister of National Revenue (2008), 377 N.R. 277; 2008 SCC 46, refd to. [para. 17].

eBay Canada Ltd. et al. v. Minister of National Revenue (2008), 382 N.R. 261; 2008 FCA 348, refd to. [para. 17].

Minister of National Revenue v. Greater Montréal Real Estate Board, [2008] 3 F.C.R. 366; 371 N.R. 7; 2007 FCA 346, refd to. [para. 17].

Artistic Ideas Inc. v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (2005), 330 N.R. 378; 2005 D.T.C. 5165; 2005 FCA 68, consd. [para. 17].

Minister of National Revenue v. Morton, [2007] F.T.R. Uned. 325; 2007 FC 503, consd. [para. 22].

Minister of National Revenue v. Advantage Credit Union, [2009] 2 F.C.R. 185; 331 F.T.R. 252 (F.C.), consd. [para. 22].

Canada v. Amex Bank of Canada (2008), 333 F.T.R. 259; 2008 FC 972, consd. [para. 23].

Statutes Noticed:

Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1, sect. 231.2(2) [para. 11].

Counsel:

Denis A. Lapierre, for the applicant;

Ian Demers, for the respondents.

Solicitors of Record:

Sweibel Novek, LLP, Montreal, Quebec, for the applicant;

John H. Sims, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondents.

This application was heard at Montreal, Quebec, on September 16, 2009, by Pinard, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following decision at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 20, 2009.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Fifty Years of Taxation at the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court. 50 Years of History
    • October 4, 2021
    ...man- 199 Canada ( Minister of National Revenue) v Cormark Securities Inc , 2012 DTC 5029 (FC); London Life v Canada (Attorney General) , 2009 FC 956. See also eBay Canada Ltd v Canada (Minister of National Revenue) , 2008 FCA 348; Canada (Minister of National Revenue) v Roofmart Ontario Inc......
  • Canada (National Revenue) v. Zeifmans LLP, 2023 FC 1000
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • July 21, 2023
    ...Canada (National Revenue) v. Amex Bank of Canada, 2008 FC 972, 333 F.T.R. 259 at para. 54, London Life v. Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FC 956, 377 F.T.R. 8 at paras. 21-24 and Ghermezian v. Canada, 2020 FC 1137 at paras. 39-41). We consider ourselves bound by the interpretation of sectio......
  • Ghermezian v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 1137
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • December 9, 2020
    ...FC 853 at paras 16-17; Canada (National Revenue) v Amex Bank of Canada, 2008 FC 972 at para 54; London Life v Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FC 956 [London Life] at paras 21-24). The Federal Court of Appeal has also adopted the interpretation of s 231.2(2) consistent with Artistic Ideals i......
  • Zeifmans LLP v. Canada, 2022 FCA 160
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • September 27, 2022
    ...Canada (National Revenue) v. Amex Bank of Canada, 2008 FC 972, 333 F.T.R. 259 at para. 54, London Life v. Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FC 956, 377 F.T.R. 8 at paras. 21-24 and Ghermezian v. Canada, 2020 FC 1137 at paras. 39-41). We consider ourselves bound by the interpretation of sectio......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 cases
  • Canada (National Revenue) v. Zeifmans LLP, 2023 FC 1000
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • July 21, 2023
    ...Canada (National Revenue) v. Amex Bank of Canada, 2008 FC 972, 333 F.T.R. 259 at para. 54, London Life v. Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FC 956, 377 F.T.R. 8 at paras. 21-24 and Ghermezian v. Canada, 2020 FC 1137 at paras. 39-41). We consider ourselves bound by the interpretation of sectio......
  • Ghermezian v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 1137
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • December 9, 2020
    ...FC 853 at paras 16-17; Canada (National Revenue) v Amex Bank of Canada, 2008 FC 972 at para 54; London Life v Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FC 956 [London Life] at paras 21-24). The Federal Court of Appeal has also adopted the interpretation of s 231.2(2) consistent with Artistic Ideals i......
  • Zeifmans LLP v. Canada, 2022 FCA 160
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • September 27, 2022
    ...Canada (National Revenue) v. Amex Bank of Canada, 2008 FC 972, 333 F.T.R. 259 at para. 54, London Life v. Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FC 956, 377 F.T.R. 8 at paras. 21-24 and Ghermezian v. Canada, 2020 FC 1137 at paras. 39-41). We consider ourselves bound by the interpretation of sectio......
  • Zeifmans LLP v. Canada (National Revenue), 2021 FC 363
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 26, 2021
    ...Union); Canada (National Revenue) v Amex Bank of Canada, 2008 FC 972 at para 54 (Amex Canada); London Life v Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FC 956 at paras 21-24 (London Life)). [39] The fact situations in Morton, Advantage Credit Union, Amex Canada and London Life are similar to that in T......
1 books & journal articles
  • Fifty Years of Taxation at the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court. 50 Years of History
    • October 4, 2021
    ...man- 199 Canada ( Minister of National Revenue) v Cormark Securities Inc , 2012 DTC 5029 (FC); London Life v Canada (Attorney General) , 2009 FC 956. See also eBay Canada Ltd v Canada (Minister of National Revenue) , 2008 FCA 348; Canada (Minister of National Revenue) v Roofmart Ontario Inc......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT