Bontje v. Canada

Bontje v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2012-02-15
Neutral citation
2012 FCA 53
File numbers
A-126-11
Decision Content
Federal Court of Appeal
Cour d'appel fédérale
Date: 20120215
Docket: A-126-11
Citation: 2012 FCA 53
CORAM: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A.
GAUTHIER J.A.
STRATAS J.A.
BETWEEN:
LARRY BONTJE
Appellant
and
FORCAP INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
Appellant
and
FORCAP INTERNATIONAL INC.
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on February 15, 2012.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on February 15, 2012.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: GAUTHIER J.A.
Federal Court of Appeal
Cour d'appel fédérale
Date: 20120215
Docket: A-126-11
Citation: 2012 FCA 53
CORAM: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A.
GAUTHIER J.A.
STRATAS J.A.
BETWEEN:
LARRY BONTJE
Appellant
and
FORCAP INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
Appellant
and
FORCAP INTERNATIONAL INC.
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on February 15, 2012)
GAUTHIER J.A.
[1] Mr. Bontje, Forcap International Ltd. and Forcap International Inc. appeal from the decision of the Federal Court dismissing their application for judicial review of the Minister of National Revenue’s decision denying their request under the Voluntary Disclosure Program because their
disclosure occurred after the initiation of an enforcement action and thus could not be considered “voluntary”.
[2] Having taken the position that the application judge erred in law on the main issues before her, in this Court the appellants essentially reargued the case they had presented to her. In its memorandum of fact and law, the respondent disagreed with the appellants’ characterization of the issues and generally supported the judge’s conclusions, except for her finding on the nature of arbitrary assessments.
[3] We express no view regarding the debate as to the nature of arbitrary assessments as the judge’s finding in that respect had no material effect on her ultimate conclusions.
[4] In our view the application judge correctly stated that the standard of review is reasonableness. Further the appellants have not convinced us that she misapplied that standard. Thus we must dismiss the appeal with costs.
"Johanne Gauthier"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-126-11
(APPEAL FROM THE ORDER OF MADAM JUSTICE SIMPSON, DATED FEBRUARY 11, 2011, IN FEDERAL COURT DOCKET NO. T-2125-09)
STYLE OF CAUSE: LARRY BONTJE AND FORCAP NTERNATIONAL LIMITED AND FORCAP INTERNATIONAL INC. v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: February 15, 2012
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF
THE COURT BY: (LAYDEN-STEVENSON, GAUTHIER &
STRATAS JJ.A.)
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: GAUTHIER J.A.
APPEARANCES:
Yoni Moussadji
Emily Hassin
FOR THE APPELLANTS
Darren Prevost
Nancy Arnold
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Rotfleisch and Samulovitch Professional Corporation
Toronto, Ontario
FOR THE APPELLANTS
Myles J. Kirvan
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
FOR THE RESPONDENT