Ross v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, (2002) 218 F.T.R. 276 (TD)

• Judge: Dawson, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: March 14, 2002
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2002), 218 F.T.R. 276 (TD)

Ross v. CCRA (2002), 218 F.T.R. 276 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] F.T.R. TBEd. AP.039

Glenn Alexander Ross (applicant) v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada (respondent)

(T-1881-01; 2002 FCT 401)

Indexed As: Ross v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Dawson, J.

April 10, 2002.

Summary:

Notices of reassessment issued to Ross in respect of the 1989 and 1990 taxation years were confirmed on January 3, 1995. By application of s. 225.1(1) of the Income Tax Act, Revenue Canada could commence collection activities with respect to Ross' indebtedness as of April 3, 1995. On September 30, 1999, a certificate in respect of the debt was registered in the court as authorized by s. 223 of the Act. On May 16, 2001, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency issued a Requirement to Pay to Ross' wife in an effort to collect the monies owed by Ross. Ross applied for judicial review with respect to the Requirement to Pay, arguing that the debt had been extinguished by s. 9(1) of the British Columbia Limitation Act where the six year limitation period in that Act had expired.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the application. The Minister had preserved the debt by filing a certificate, which, as stated in s. 223(3) of the Act, had the same effect as a judgment. The debt had not been extinguished and the Requirement to Pay was properly issued.

Income Tax - Topic 9327

Enforcement - Judgments - Certificate of Minister - Nature of - Notices of reassessment issued to Ross in respect of the 1989 and 1990 taxation years were confirmed on January 3, 1995 - By application of s. 225.1(1) of the Income Tax Act, Revenue Canada could commence collection activities with respect to Ross' indebtedness as of April 3, 1995 - On September 30, 1999, a certificate in respect of the debt was registered in the court as authorized by s. 223 of the Act - On May 16, 2001, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency issued a Requirement to Pay to Ross' wife in an effort to collect the monies owed by Ross - Ross argued that the debt had been extinguished by s. 9(1) of the British Columbia Limitation Act where the six year limitation period provided in that Act had expired - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that the Minister had preserved the debt by filing a certificate, which, as stated in s. 223(3) of the Act, had the same effect as a judgment - The debt had not been extinguished and the Requirement to Pay was properly issued.

Income Tax - Topic 9421

Enforcement - Limitation of actions - General - [See Income Tax - Topic 9327 ].

Income Tax - Topic 9429

Enforcement - Limitation of actions - Requirements to pay - [See Income Tax - Topic 9327 ].

Cases Noticed:

Markevich v. Minister of National Revenue, [2001] 3 F.C. 449; 270 N.R. 275 (F.C.A.), leave to appeal granted (2001), 285 N.R. 191 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 9].

Minister of National Revenue v. Bolduc, [1961] Ex. C.R. 115, refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Star Treck Holdings Ltd., [1978] 1 F.C. 61 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 21].

Canada v. T.H. Parker (1981), 2 C.E.R. 181 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 21].

Price (E.H.) Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1983] 2 F.C. 841; 47 N.R. 312 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

Canada v. Olympia Interiors Ltd., [2001] N.R. Uned. 244 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

Olympia Interiors Ltd. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [2002] N.R. Uned. 252 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

Statutes Noticed:

Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1, sect. 223(3), sect. 224(1) [para. 13].

Counsel:

Glenn A. Ross, on his own behalf;

Donnaree Nygard, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Morris Rosenberg, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent.

This application was heard on March 14, 2002, at Vancouver, British Columbia, before Dawson, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision on April 10, 2002.