Nametco Holdings Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue)
Court headnote
Nametco Holdings Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-04-24 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 149 File numbers A-729-01 Decision Content Date: 20020424 Docket: A-729-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 149 CORAM: STRAYER J.A. BETWEEN: NAMETCO HOLDINGS LTD. Applicant and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER STRAYER J.A. [1] The motion is dismissed to amend the notices of application for judicial review. This is not a request to clarify or amend the judicial review application itself but rather to raise a new issue that was not before the Tax Court whose decision is under review. [2] One cannot rely in such a motion on precedents involving the amendment of pleadings before or during a trial, where the trial court will ultimately have all the necessary evidence and both parties can examine or cross-examine witnesses on the amended issues. Nor is it like seeking leave to introduce new evidence on appeal. There are strict requirements for that special measure, even if it applied here (which it does not), and the applicant has not met the criteria for such introduction. Instead this is a judicial review whose purpose is to see if the tribunal whose decision is under review committed any reviewable error in the way it dealt with the case before it, not some other case it might have heard but did not. New evidence is admitted on judicial review only on occasions where it is relevant to some issue conce…
Read full judgment
Nametco Holdings Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2002-04-24 Neutral citation 2002 FCA 149 File numbers A-729-01 Decision Content Date: 20020424 Docket: A-729-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 149 CORAM: STRAYER J.A. BETWEEN: NAMETCO HOLDINGS LTD. Applicant and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER STRAYER J.A. [1] The motion is dismissed to amend the notices of application for judicial review. This is not a request to clarify or amend the judicial review application itself but rather to raise a new issue that was not before the Tax Court whose decision is under review. [2] One cannot rely in such a motion on precedents involving the amendment of pleadings before or during a trial, where the trial court will ultimately have all the necessary evidence and both parties can examine or cross-examine witnesses on the amended issues. Nor is it like seeking leave to introduce new evidence on appeal. There are strict requirements for that special measure, even if it applied here (which it does not), and the applicant has not met the criteria for such introduction. Instead this is a judicial review whose purpose is to see if the tribunal whose decision is under review committed any reviewable error in the way it dealt with the case before it, not some other case it might have heard but did not. New evidence is admitted on judicial review only on occasions where it is relevant to some issue concerning the hearing procedure, or jurisdiction, of a tribunal. [3] The motion must therefore be dismissed. (s) "B.L. Strayer" J.A.
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca