Québec (Sous-ministre du Revenu) et autres v. 143471 Canada Inc. et autres,

• Jurisdiction: Federal Jurisdiction (Canada)
• Judge: McLachlin and Iacobucci, JJ.
• Citation: (1994), 167 N.R. 321 (SCC),[1994] SCJ No 45 (QL),[1994] 2 SCR 339,90 CCC (3d) 1,31 CR (4th) 120,61 QAC 81,1994 CanLII 89 (SCC),167 NR 321,21 CRR (2d) 245,[1995] 1 CTC 27
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Date: 26 May 1994

Qué. v. 143471 Can. Inc. (1994), 167 N.R. 321 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

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

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

Le ministre du Revenu du Québec, Le Sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec, Le Procureur général du Québec and Robert Paulin ( appellants) v. 143471 Canada Inc., Leonardo Arcuri, Francesco Milioto, Antonio Facchino, John A. Paoletti, Santo Gracioppo and Casimiro C. Panarello (respondents)

Le ministre du Revenu du Québec, Le Sous-ministre du Revenu du Québec, Le Procureur général du Québec and François Laramée ( appellants) v. Maurice Tabah, 116689 Canada Inc., Les Entreprises Immobilières Maurice Tabah Inc., Georges Abouassly, Ibrahim Haddad, Fernand Hétu, Paul-Omer Desrosiers, Me Johanne Piette and Service Immobilier Joliette Inc. (respondents

(22989)

Indexed As: Québec (Sous-ministre du Revenu) et autres v. 143471 Canada Inc. et autres

Supreme Court of Canada

Lamer, C.J.C., La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Cory,

McLachlin and Iacobucci, JJ.

May 26, 1994.

Summary:

The respondents in this appeal were alleged to have attempted to avoid payment of sums of money pursuant to the Meals and Hotels Tax Act (Que.). By virtue of s. 40 of the Act respecting the Ministère du Revenu (Que.), the Court of Québec issued written authorizations to conduct searches. These searches were conducted at the places of business of the corporate respondents and the homes of the respondents Arcuri and Tabah. Several documents were seized.

The respondents invoked ss. 7 and 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and s. 24.1 of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and brought two court actions to challenge the legality of the search warrants. They sought to quash the seizure authorizations and their execution and to attack the constitutionality of ss. 40 and 40.1 of the Act respecting the Ministère du Revenu. By way of interlocutory relief the respondents presented motions to have all the seized documents impounded so they could be sealed and given into the custody of a third party pending a final judgment on the legality challenge.

In the action brought by 143471 Canada Inc., the Quebec Superior Court (Hannan, J.), in a judgment reported [1990] R.D.F.Q. 104, allowed the motion to impound.

In a judgment reported [1992] R.D.F.Q. 48, the Quebec Superior Court (Croteau, J.) dismissed the challenge to the legality of the search warrants and declared s. 40 constitutional. The respondents appealed that decision and asked the Court of Appeal to issue an order impounding the seized documents for the duration of the proceedings.

In a judgment reported (1992), 32 A.C.W.S.(3d) 226, the Quebec Court of Appeal allowed the motion to impound. On April 13, 1994, the court heard the appeal from the decision of Croteau J. and reserved its judgment.

In the action brought by Tabah, the Quebec Superior Court (Marquis, J.), in a judgment reported [1991] R.D.F.Q. 90, allowed the motion to impound. The appellants brought an appeal.

In a judgment reported [1992] R.D.F.Q. 44, the Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the motion to impound.

The appellants appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada on the motions to impound.

The Supreme Court of Canada, La Forest, L'Heureux- Dubé and McLachlin, JJ., dissenting, dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 1441

Security of the person - Right to privacy - General - Pursuant to court authorizations issued under the Act respecting the Ministère du Revenu (Que.), Quebec Revenue authorities searched the premises of businesses and the homes of persons alleged to have attempted to avoid payment of certain taxes - Many documents were seized - The businesses and the persons brought a Canadian and Quebec Charter challenge against the legislative provisions authorizing the searches and seizures - They also asked for an order impounding all documents seized pending final decision on the challenge - The Supreme Court of Canada, applying the Metropolitan Stores test, discussed the plaintiffs' right to privacy and the Revenue authorities' power to administer tax laws and affirmed the impounding order granted in first instance.

Droits et libertés - Cote 1441

Sécurité - Droit au respect de la vie privée - Généralités - [Voir Civil Rights - Topic 1441]

Civil Rights - Topic 7113

ederal or provincial legislation - Practice - Impounding of documents pending final decision - Pursuant to court authorizations issued under the Act respecting the Ministère du Revenu ( Que.), Quebec Revenue authorities searched the premises of businesses and the homes of persons alleged to have attempted to avoid payment of certain taxes - Many documents were seized - The businesses and the persons brought a Quebec Charter challenge against the legislative provisions authorizing the searches and seizures - They also asked for an order impounding all documents seized pending final decision on the challenge - The Supreme Court of Canada, applying the Metropolitan Stores test, discussed the plaintiffs' right to privacy and the Revenue authorities' power to administer tax laws and affirmed the impounding order granted in first instance.

Droits et libertés - Cote 7113

Législation fédérale ou provinciale - Procédure - Entiercement de documents en attendant une décision finale - [Voir Civil Rights - Topic 7113].

Civil Rights - Topic 8587.2

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Practice - Impounding of documents pending litigation of Charter issue - Pursuant to court authorizations issued under the Act respecting the Ministère du Revenu (Que.), Quebec Revenue authorities searched the premises of businesses and the homes of persons alleged to have attempted to avoid payment of certain taxes - Many documents were seized - The businesses and the persons brought a Charter challenge against the legislative provisions authorizing the searches and seizures - They also asked for an order impounding all documents seized pending final decision on the challenge - The Supreme Court of Canada, applying the Metropolitan Stores test, discussed the plaintiffs' right to privacy and the Revenue authorities' power to administer tax laws and affirmed the impounding order granted in first instance.

Droits et libertés - Cote 8587.2

Charte canadienne des droits et libertés - Procédure - Entiercement de documents en attendant l'issue d'une action fondée sur la Charte - [Voir Civil Rights - Topic 8587.2].

Cases Noticed:

Metropolitan Stores (MTS) Ltd. v. Manitoba Food and Commercial Workers, Local 832 and Labour Board (Man.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 110; 73 N.R. 341; 46 Man.R.(2d) 241; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 321; 18 C.P.C.(2d) 273; 25 Admin. L.R. 20, folld. [paras. 1, 52].

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311; 164 N.R. 1; 60 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [paras. 1, 65].

Hadmor Productions Ltd. v. Hamilton, [1982] 1 All E.R. 1042 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 4].

Feigelman, Feigelman, Goldberg, R.L.L. Holdings Ltd. and Pre-Vue Co. (Canada) Ltd. v. Aetna Financial Services Ltd., Lax and Burke, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 2; 56 N.R. 241; 32 Man.R.(2d) 241, refd to. [para. 4].

Friends of the Oldman River Society v. Canada ( Minister of Transport and Minister of Fisheries and Oceans), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 3; 132 N.R. 321, refd to. [para. 4].

Thomson Newspapers Ltd. v. Director of Investigation and Research, Combines Investigation Act et al., [1990] 1 S.C.R. 425; 106 N.R. 161; 39 O.A.C. 161; 54 C.C.C.(3d) 417; 76 C.R.(3d) 129; 67 D.L.R.(4th) 161; 29 C.P.R.(3d) 97; 47 C.R.R. 1, refd to. [paras. 5, 53].

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. [paras. 6, 53].

R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc. and Chedore, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154; 130 N.R. 1; 49 O.A.C. 161; 67 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 8 C.R.( 4th) 145, refd to. [paras. 7, 40, 79].

Baron et al. v. Minister of National Revenue et al., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 416; 146 N.R. 270, refd to. [paras. 14, 67].

Brochetterie Tino Inc. v. Québec (Procureur général), [1989] R.D.F.Q. 98 (S.C.), refd to. [paras. 28, 103].

Restaurant le Gourmet grec Inc. v. Séguin, [1989] R.D.F.Q. 80 (S.C.), refd to. [paras. 28, 103].

Cuisines Multiform internationales Inc. v. Angers, [1992] R.D.F.Q. 46 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

Cuisines Multiform internationales Inc. v. Angers, [1992] R.D.F.Q. 126 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

Electro Marine Diesel Inc. v. Québec (Procureur général), [1992] R.D.F.Q. 125 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

Groupe Shakiba Inc. v. Québec (Procureur général), [1993] R.D.F.Q. 70 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

Zeppetelli v. Canada, [1990] 2 C.T.C. 354 (Que. C.A.), consd. [paras. 29, 54].

Edmonton Journal v. Alberta (Attorney General), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1326; 102 N.R. 321; 103 A.R. 321; [1990] 1 W.W.R. 577; 64 D.L.R.(4th) 577; 71 Alta. L.R.(2d) 273; 45 C.R.R. 1, refd to. [paras. 39, 78].

Royal College of Dental Surgeons (Ont.) et al. v. Rocket and Price, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 232; 111 N.R. 161; 40 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 39].

Kindler v. Canada (Minister of Justice), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 779; 129 N.R. 81, refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Généreux, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 259; 133 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 39].

Baron et al. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1991] 1 F.C. 688; 122 N.R. 47 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 57].

Reference re Section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (B.C.), [1985] 2 S.C.R. 486; 63 N.R. 266; 48 C.R.(3d) 289; 23 C.C.C.( 3d) 289; [1986] 1 W.W.R. 481, refd to. [para. 61].

Southam Inc. v. Hunter, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145; 55 N.R. 241; 55 A.R. 291; 9 C.R.R. 355; 14 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 41 C.R.(3d) 97; [1984] 6 W.W.R. 577; 33 Alta. L.R.(2d) 193; 27 B.L.R. 297; 84 D.T.C. 6467; 2 C.P.R.(3d) 1; 11 D.L.R.(4th) 641, refd to. [para. 67].

Kourtessis et al. v. Minister of National Revenue et al., [1993] 2 S.C.R. 53; 27 B.C.A.C. 81; 45 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Dyment, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 417; 89 N.R. 249; 73 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 13; 229 A.P.R. 13; 45 C.C.C.(3d) 244; 10 M.V.R.(2d) 1; 66 C.R.(3d) 348; 55 D.L.R.(4th) 503, refd to. [para. 76].

United States of America v. Cotroni; United States of America v. El Zein, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1469; 96 N.R. 321; 23 Q.A.C. 182, refd to. [para. 78].

Air Canada and Pacific Western Airlines Ltd. v. British Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1161; 95 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 99].

Bâtiments Fafard Inc./Fafard Buildings System Inc. v. R., J.E. 90-1187 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 100].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982/Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, 1982, generally [para. 1]; sect. 7 [para. 49]; sect. 8 [para. 11].

Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms/Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, R.S.Q. 1977, c. C-12, sect. 24.1 [para. 49].

Criminal Code/Code Criminel, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, generally [para. 6].

Income Tax Act/Impôt sur le Revenu, Loi de l', R.S.C. 1952, c. 148, generally [para. 9]; sect. 231(3) [para. 11].

Meals and Hotels Tax Act/Taxe sur les repas et l'hôtellerie, Loi concernant la, R.S.Q. 1977, c. T-3, generally [para. 48].

Ministère du Revenu, An Act Respecting, R.S.Q. 1977/Ministère du Revenu, Loi sur le, c. M-31, generally [para. 9]; sect. 34, sect. 34(1) [para. 83]; sect. 38 [para. 18]; sect. 38(a) [para. 84]; sect. 39 [para. 18]; sect. 39(a), sect. 39(b) [para. 85]; sect. 40, sect. 40.1 [para. 11]; sect. 40.2 [para. 94]; sect. 46, sect. 53 [para. 86]; sect. 69 [para. 19]; sect. 78 [para. 95].

Counsel:

Michel Dansereau, Judith Kucharsky and Pierre Gonthier, for the appellants;

Guy Du Pont, Basile Angelopoulos and Ariane Bourque, for the respondents.

Solicitors of Record:

Veillette & Associés, Montréal, Québec, for the appellants;

Phillips & Vineberg, Montréal, Québec, for respondents 143471 Canada Inc., Arcuri, Milioto, Facchino, Paoletti, Gracioppo, Panarello, Tabah, 116689 Canada Inc., Entreprises Immobilières Maurice Tabah Inc., Abouassly, Haddad, Desrosiers, Piette et Service Immobilier Joliette Inc.;

Woods, Brouillette, Des Marais, Montréal, Québec, for respondent Hétu.

This case appeal was heard on October 5, 1993, by Lamer, C.J.C., La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Cory, McLachlin and Iacobucci, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.

The judgment of the Supreme Court was delivered in both official languages on May 26, 1994, and the following opinions were filed:

Cory, J. (Sopinka and Iacobucci, JJ., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 37;

Lamer, C.J.C., concurring - see paragraphs 38 to 46;

La Forest, J., dissenting (L'Heureux-Dubé and McLachlin, JJ., concurring) - see paragraphs 47 to 107.