Pugh v. Canada

Pugh v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2008-01-10
Neutral citation
2008 FCA 7
File numbers
A-83-07
Decision Content
Date: 20080110
Docket: A-83-07
Citation: 2008 FCA 7
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
HAYDN PUGH
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Heard at Montréal, Quebec, on January 8, 2008.
Judgment delivered at Montréal, Quebec, on January 10, 2008.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: NADON J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
Date: 20080110
Docket: A-83-07
Citation: 2008 FCA 7
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
HAYDN PUGH
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
NADON J.A.
[1] This is an appeal from a decision of Madam Justice Lamarre Proulx of the Tax Court of Canada dated January 19, 2007 which dismissed the appellant’s appeal from the Minister’s assessment of his 2000 taxation year.
[2] More particularly, the appeal pertains to the 1989 market value of a rental building owned by the appellant in St. Lambert, Province of Quebec, which the Tax Court judge found was $50,000.
[3] The appellant takes the position that the market value was $175,000 while the Minister supports the value found by the judge.
[4] I am of the view that there is no basis whatsoever to interfere with the Tax Court’s decision. The judge clearly found the 1989 value of the building to be $50,000 on the basis of the evidence before her, namely: (i) municipal evaluations for the years 1985 and 1994 which respectively set the value of the building at $53,700 and $40,100 and (ii) an out-of-court settlement between the appellant and the Minister relating to the appellant’s taxation years 1992 to 1994 where the value was agreed at $50,000.
[5] Before the Tax Court, the appellant, upon whom the burden of proof lied, did not adduce any evidence to prove that the fair market value of his building was $175,000 in 1989, nor did he bring any evidence to support a value greater than $50,000.
[6] Consequently, as I am satisfied that Madam Justice Lamarre Proulx made no error of law nor any palpable and overriding error in assessing the evidence before her, I would dismiss the appeal with costs.
“Marc Nadon”
J.A.
“I agree.
Robert Décary J.A.”
“I agree.
Gilles Létourneau J.A.”
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-83-07
(Appeal from the decision of the Tax Court of Canada dated January 19, 2007 in file
2005-1869(IT)G.)
STYLE OF CAUSE: HAYDN PUGH v.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: January 8, 2008
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: NADON J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
DATED: January 10, 2008
APPEARANCES:
Haydn Pugh
ON HIS OWN BEHALF
Stéphanie Côté
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
John H. Sims, Q.C
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Montréal, Quebec
FOR THE RESPONDENT