“To the extent the minister dismissed, disregarded, suppressed or misapprehended proof, an charm underneath the common treatment in the Tax Court is an satisfactory, curative remedy,” Justice Rennie wrote. “In the Tax Court attractiveness, the get-togethers will have the opportunity to find out and existing documentary and oral proof and make submissions.”
The court docket added that this reasoning is similarly dispositive of the 2nd declaration asked for – that the assessments were made devoid of an evidentiary basis.
“Whether the assessment built by the minister is sustained by the evidence is a issue precisely inside of the legislative mandate of the Tax Courtroom,” Justice Rennie wrote.
Concerning the 3rd declaration, the court held that the mere point that the minister issued an assessment did not oust the jurisdiction of the Federal Court. Where by the Tax Courtroom does not have jurisdiction to offer with the minister’s carry out or where by the true objective of the application is to request useful aid against the training of discretion, the court docket identified that the bar in s. 18.5 of the Federal Courts Act does not utilize.
Area 18.5 provides that if an act of Parliament expressly offers for an attractiveness to courts from a final decision of a federal board, commission, or tribunal, that final decision is not subject to evaluate or to be eliminated or established apart.