Zador v. Canada

Zador v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2007-04-30
Neutral citation
2007 FCA 175
File numbers
A-412-06
Notes
Digest
Decision Content
Date: 20070430
Docket: A-412-06
Citation: 2007 FCA 175
CORAM: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
EVANS J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
BETWEEN:
JOSEPH GEORGE ZADOR
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on April 30, 2007.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on April 30, 2007.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A.
Date: 20070430
Docket: A-412-06
Citation: 2007 FCA 175
CORAM: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
EVANS J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
BETWEEN:
JOSEPH GEORGE ZADOR
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on April 30, 2007)
SHARLOW J.A.
[1] This is an appeal of a judgment of the Tax Court of Canada (2006 TCC 545) dismissing the appellants’ income tax appeal for 2004.
[2] The issue is whether the Tax Court Judge was correct when he concluded that a moving expense is deductible under subsection 62(1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th supp.) only when it is paid. The relevant parts of subsection 62(1) reads as follows (my emphasis):
62. (1) […] there may be deducted amounts paid by the taxpayer as or on account of moving expenses incurred in the course of moving from the old residence to the new residence […].
62. (1) […] il peut déduire […] les sommes qu’il a payées au titre des frais de déménagement engages pour déménager de son ancienne residence pour venire occuper sa nouvelle residence […]
[3] Mr. Zador argues that a moving expense is deductible when the taxpayer incurs a legal obligation to pay it. The Tax Court Judge did not accept Mr. Zador’s interpretation. He concluded that subsection 62(1) requires that a moving expense be paid before it is eligible for a deduction under that provision. We agree with him. In our view, the words of subsection 62(1) cannot reasonably bear the interpretation proposed by Mr. Zador.
[4] This appeal will be dismissed with costs.
“K. Sharlow”
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-412-06
STYLE OF CAUSE: JOSEPH GEORGE ZADOR v. HMQ
PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia
DATE OF HEARING: April 30, 2007
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
EVANS J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: SHARLOW J.A.
DATED: April 30, 2007
APPEARANCES:
Joseph George Zador ON HIS OWN BEHALF
Sara Fairbridge FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
FOR THE RESPONDENT