Minister of National Revenue v. Greater Montréal Real Estate Board, (2006) 303 F.T.R. 29 (FC)

• Judge: Gauthier, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: July 27, 2006
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2006), 303 F.T.R. 29 (FC);2006 FC 1069

MNR v. Real Estate Bd. (2006), 303 F.T.R. 29 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2006] F.T.R. TBEd. SE.045

Ministre du Revenu national (demandeur) v. Chambre immobilière du Grand Montréal (défenderesse)

(T-1080-05; 2006 CF 1069; 2006 FC 1069)

Indexed As: Minister of National Revenue v. Greater Montréal Real Estate Board

Federal Court

Gauthier, J.

September 6, 2006.

Summary:

The Minister of National Revenue obtained an ex parte order under s. 231.2(3) of the Income Tax Act requiring a real estate board to provide information relating to its members, who were real estate agents and brokers. The board asked the court to cancel the order.

The Federal Court vacated the order.

Income Tax - Topic 9258

Enforcement - Production of information - Demand of information - Respecting unnamed persons - The Minister of National Revenue obtained an ex parte order under s. 231.2(3) of the Income Tax Act requiring a real estate board to provide information relating to its members, who were real estate agents and brokers - The request was part of an audit project to determine whether commissions were being reported - The board asked the court to cancel the order - The Federal Court vacated the order - The Minister had established that the order concerned an ascertainable group of persons, as required by s. 231.2(3)(a) - However, the evidence regarding the project's nature was unclear - It appeared to be aimed at selecting members of the group to be audited later - Section 231.2(3)(b) was clear that the information had to be requested for the purpose of verifying whether the persons being investigated had complied with some duties or obligations set out in the Act - The Minister had not established that the information was needed to determine whether each person being investigated had complied with the Act by reporting all of their income - The Minister could apply for a new authorization supported by more evidence to show that a genuine audit of each member was under way.

Cases Noticed:

Fédération des Caisses populaires Desjardins de Québec v. Minister of National Revenue, [1997] 2 C.T.C. 159 (Que. S.C.), refd to. [para. 17].

Minister of National Revenue v. National Foundation for Christian Leadership (2004), 264 F.T.R. 36; 2004 FC 1753, refd to. [para. 17].

Minister of National Revenue v. Sand Exploration Ltd. et al. (1995), 96 F.T.R. 113 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 17].

Artistic Ideas Inc. v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (2005), 330 N.R. 378; 2005 FCA 68, refd to. [para. 17].

Redeemer Foundation v. Minister of National Revenue (2005), 281 F.T.R. 143; 2005 FC 1361, refd to. [para. 17].

Minister of National Revenue v. Welton Parent Inc. (2006), 286 F.T.R. 161; 2006 FC 67, refd to. [para. 17].

Richardson (James) & Sons Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 614; 54 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 21].

Canadian Bank of Commerce v. Canada (Attorney General), [1962] S.C.R. 729, refd to. [para. 21].

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, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Jarvis (W.J.), [2002] 3 S.C.R. 757; 295 N.R. 201; 317 A.R. 1; 284 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 45].

Canadian Forest Products Ltd. et al. v. Minister of National Revenue (1996), 119 F.T.R. 152 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 48].

Statutes Noticed:

Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1, sect. 231.2(3) [para. 20].

Counsel:

Pierre Lamothe and Maria Bittichesu, for the applicant;

Simon Grégoire, François Morin and Virginie Chan, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

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

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, Montreal, Quebec, for the respondent.

This application was heard at Montréal, Quebec, on July 27, 2006, by Gauthier, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following reasons for order at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 6, 2006.