Federal Court of Appeal Overturns Guindon Decision of Tax Court of Canada

We previously wrote about the Tax Court of Canada decision released on October 2, 2012, Guindon v. R., 2012 TCC 287 (“Guindon”).  The Guindon decision had dramatic implications for any Canadians who were assessed third party penalties pursuant to section 163.2 of the Income Tax Act (the “Tax Act”).  The decision found that the penalties were, in substance, criminal penalties.  This finding had far reaching implications for administration of section 163.2 with respect to:

1. the applicable standard of proof;
2. section 11 Charter of Rights and Freedoms protections for those accused; and
3. restriction on the information gathering power of the Canada Revenue Agency in the admininstration of these penalties.

The Crown appealed the Tax Court decision to the Federal Court of Appeal and the judgement of the Tax Court of Canada was overturned in Canada v. Guindon, 2013 FCA 153.

Among other findings, the Federal Court of Appeal found the penalties are administrative as opposed to criminal penalties.

The full text of the Federal Court of Appeal decision can be found here: http://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/site/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/37806/index.do?r=AAAAAQAHZ3VpbmRvbgAAAAAAAAE.

---

The content made available on this website has been provided solely for general informational purposes as of the date published and should NOT be treated as or relied upon as legal advice. It is not to be construed as a representation, warranty, or guarantee, and may not be accurate, current, complete, or fit for a particular purpose or circumstance. If you are seeking legal advice, a professional at Pushor Mitchell LLP would be pleased to assist you in resolving your legal concerns in the context of your particular circumstances.

It is prohibited to reproduce, modify, republish, or in any way use content from this website without express written permission from the Chief Operating Officer or the Managing Partner at Pushor Mitchell LLP. Third party content that references this publication is not endorsed by Pushor Mitchell LLP and in no way represents the views of the firm. We do not guarantee the accuracy of, nor accept responsibility for the content of any source that may link, quote, or reference this publication.

Please read and understand our full Website Terms of Use and Disclaimer here.