Minister of National Revenue v. Vallelonga, (2013) 442 F.T.R. 270 (FC)

• Judge: Noël, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: November 04, 2013
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2013), 442 F.T.R. 270 (FC);2013 FC 1155

MNR v. Vallelonga (2013), 442 F.T.R. 270 (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: [2013] F.T.R. TBEd. NO.038

The Minister of National Revenue (applicant) v. Rosario Vallelonga (respondent)

(T-695-12; 2013 FC 1155; 2013 CF 1155)

Indexed As: Minister of National Revenue v. Vallelonga

Federal Court

Noël, J.

November 14, 2013.

Summary:

Vallelonga failed to comply with a compliance order issued under s. 231.7 of the Income Tax Act. The Minister of National Revenue sought an order that Vallelonga was in contempt of court. Vallelonga acknowledged having failed to produce the requested information and documents, but asserted that he would do so within 60 days.

The Federal Court found that Vallelonga was in contempt of court. Vallelonga was sentenced to pay a fine of $3,000 and the Minister's solicitor and client costs of $14,731.59 (including the costs of the contempt hearing) within 60 days. Failure to do so would result in imprisonment for up to 30 days or until the amounts were paid. Vallelonga was also ordered to provide the information and documents set out in the compliance order within 60 days. Failure to comply would result in imprisonment for up to three years or until compliance. Vallelonga could avoid imprisonment in both instances by providing the Minister with a full explanation for the failure to pay or to produce the information and documents.

Contempt - Topic 684

What constitutes contempt - Judgments and orders - Disobedience of or non-compliance with - [See Contempt - Topic 3301 ].

Contempt - Topic 3301

Punishment - General (incl. considerations) - Vallelonga failed to comply with a compliance order issued under s. 231.7 of the Income Tax Act - The Minister of National Revenue sought an order that Vallelonga was in contempt of court - Vallelonga acknowledged having failed to produce the requested information and documents, but asserted that he would do so within 60 days - The Federal Court found that Vallelonga was in contempt of court - Vallelonga had been personally served with the compliance order and the show cause order and had failed to comply - His undertaking to do so within 60 days did not change the present situation - Contempt had occurred - Vallelonga had completely ignored the Minister's request for information and had demonstrated no true intention of ever cooperating - His undertaking was a mitigating factor - His failure to comply while fully aware that he was obligated to do so was an aggravating factor - Vallelonga was sentenced to pay a fine of $3,000 and the Minister's solicitor and client costs of $14,731.59 (including the costs of the contempt hearing) within 60 days - Failure to do so would result in imprisonment for up to 30 days or until the amounts were paid - Vallelonga was also ordered to provide the information and documents set out in the compliance order within 60 days - Failure to comply would result in imprisonment for up to three years or until compliance - Vallelonga could avoid imprisonment in both instances by providing the Minister with a full explanation for the failure to pay or to produce the information and documents.

Contempt - Topic 3315

Punishment - Fines - [See Contempt - Topic 3301 ].

Contempt - Topic 3325

Punishment - Imprisonment - When appropriate - [See Contempt - Topic 3301 ].

Contempt - Topic 5115

Practice - Hearing - Costs - [See Contempt - Topic 3301 ].

Practice - Topic 7408

Costs - Solicitor and client costs - General principles - Solicitor and client costs as damages or punishment - [See Contempt - Topic 3301 ].

Practice - Topic 7464

Costs - Solicitor and client costs - Entitlement to solicitor and client costs - In contempt proceedings - [See Contempt - Topic 3301 ].

Cases Noticed:

Minister of National Revenue v. Marshall (2006), 294 F.T.R. 297; 2006 FC 788, refd to. [para. 26].

Counsel:

Amelia Fink, for the applicant;

Rosario Vallelonga, on his own behalf, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

William F. Pentney, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the applicant.

This application was heard at Montreal, Quebec, on November 4, 2013, by Noël, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following reasons for order at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 14, 2013.