Edmonds v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue)
Source text
Edmonds v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-06-12 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 256 File numbers A-216-00 Decision Content Date: 20020612 Docket: A-216-00 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 256 CORAM: ISAAC J.A. NOËL J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: MAE EDMONDS, O/A A-1 LUMPERS Applicant and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER (Delivered from the bench at Fredericton, NB, on June 12, 2002) SEXTON J. A. [1] In our view, it has not been shown that the Tax Court Judge committed any error in holding that the lumpers were employees within the meaning of Section 6(g) of the Employment Insurance Regulations. It provides as follows; 6. Employment in any of the following employments, unless it is excluded from insurable employment by any provision of the Regulations, is included in the insurable employment: (g) employment of a person who is placed in that employment by a placement or employment agency to preform services for and under the direction and control of a client of the agency, where that person is renumerated by the agency for the performance of those services. [2] In particular the evidence, when considered in light of the assumptions relied upon by the Minister, allowed the Tax Court Judge to conclude that the lumpers were placed in employment under the supervision of the shippers and were paid by the Applicant for the service which they provided. [3] The Application will be dismissed with cost. "Ed…
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
Edmonds v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-06-12 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 256 File numbers A-216-00 Decision Content Date: 20020612 Docket: A-216-00 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 256 CORAM: ISAAC J.A. NOËL J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: MAE EDMONDS, O/A A-1 LUMPERS Applicant and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER (Delivered from the bench at Fredericton, NB, on June 12, 2002) SEXTON J. A. [1] In our view, it has not been shown that the Tax Court Judge committed any error in holding that the lumpers were employees within the meaning of Section 6(g) of the Employment Insurance Regulations. It provides as follows; 6. Employment in any of the following employments, unless it is excluded from insurable employment by any provision of the Regulations, is included in the insurable employment: (g) employment of a person who is placed in that employment by a placement or employment agency to preform services for and under the direction and control of a client of the agency, where that person is renumerated by the agency for the performance of those services. [2] In particular the evidence, when considered in light of the assumptions relied upon by the Minister, allowed the Tax Court Judge to conclude that the lumpers were placed in employment under the supervision of the shippers and were paid by the Applicant for the service which they provided. [3] The Application will be dismissed with cost. "Edgar J. Sexton" J. A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-216-00 STYLE OF CAUSE: MAE EDMONDS, O\A A-1 LUMPERS v. THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE PLACE OF HEARING: Fredericton, New Brunswick DATE OF HEARING: June 12, 2002 REASONS FOR ORDER: Sexton, J.A. DATED: June 12, 2002 APPEARANCES: Luc Elsliger FOR THE APPLICANT Bernard Fontaine FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Stewart McKelvey Stirling Scales FOR THE APPLICANT Barristers and Solicitors 601-644 Main Street Blue Cross Centre P. O. Box 28051 Moncton, NB E1C 9N4 Department of Justice FOR THE RESPONDENT Quebec Regional Office Guy-Favreau Complex 200 René-Levesque Blvd. West Montreal, Quebec H2Z 1X4
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca
Quebec (Attorney General) v A
[2013] 1 SCR 61