Skip to main content
Federal Court of Appeal· 2003

Simard v. Canada (Attorney General)

2003 FCA 410
ContractJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Simard v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2003-11-03 Neutral citation 2003 FCA 410 File numbers A-579-02 Decision Content Date: 20031103 Docket: A-579-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 410 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. NOËL J.A. NADON J.A. BETWEEN: MICHEL SIMARD Applicant and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on November 3, 2003. Judgment from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on November 3, 2003. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: DÉCARY J.A. Date: 20031103 Docket: A-579-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 410 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. NOËL J.A. NADON J.A. BETWEEN: MICHEL SIMARD Applicant and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on November 3, 2003) DÉCARY J.A. [1] This Court was not persuaded that, in the circumstances of the case at bar, the Tax Court of Canada judge erred in concluding that the applicant, who operated a skidder owned by his own company, was not an employee for the purposes of the Employment Insurance Act. [2] Based in particular on the wording of the only contract entered in evidence, titled [TRANSLATION] "Hiring of personnel services", it was entirely reasonable to conclude that the applicant was actually an employee of the company, rather than an employee of the forestry cutting business with which the company had concluded the contract. Accordingly, the judge properly concluded at paragraph 36 of his reasons that: [TRANSL…

Read full judgment
Simard v. Canada (Attorney General)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2003-11-03
Neutral citation
2003 FCA 410
File numbers
A-579-02
Decision Content
Date: 20031103
Docket: A-579-02
Citation: 2003 FCA 410
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
MICHEL SIMARD
Applicant
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CANADA
Respondent
Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on November 3, 2003.
Judgment from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on November 3, 2003.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: DÉCARY J.A.
Date: 20031103
Docket: A-579-02
Citation: 2003 FCA 410
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
MICHEL SIMARD
Applicant
and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on November 3, 2003)
DÉCARY J.A.
[1] This Court was not persuaded that, in the circumstances of the case at bar, the Tax Court of Canada judge erred in concluding that the applicant, who operated a skidder owned by his own company, was not an employee for the purposes of the Employment Insurance Act.
[2] Based in particular on the wording of the only contract entered in evidence, titled [TRANSLATION] "Hiring of personnel services", it was entirely reasonable to conclude that the applicant was actually an employee of the company, rather than an employee of the forestry cutting business with which the company had concluded the contract. Accordingly, the judge properly concluded at paragraph 36 of his reasons that:
[TRANSLATION]
The appellant's real employer was 2425-9483 Québec Inc., but . . . that employment is not insurable because the appellant controlled over 40% of the company's voting shares.
[3] The application for judicial review will be dismissed with costs.
"Robert Décary"
J.A.
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, C. Tr., LL.L.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-579-02
(APPEAL FROM TAX COURT OF CANADA DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 9, 2002, CASE No. 2000-4739 (EI))
STYLE OF CAUSE: MICHEL SIMARD
v.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: November 3, 2003
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: DÉCARY J.A.
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH (BY): DÉCARY, NOËL, NADON JJ.A.
APPEARANCES:
Gilles Nadon FOR THE APPLICANT
Nathalie Labbé FOR THE RESPONDENT
Julie David
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
OUELLET, NADON & ASSOCIÉS FOR THE APPLICANT
Montréal, Quebec
MORRIS ROSENBERG FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Montréal, Quebec

Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca

Related cases