Law Times

Law Times • may 29, 2017 Page 13 www.lawtimesnews.com CASELAW Supreme Court of Canada Criminal Law CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS Right to be tried within reasonable time [s. 11(b)] Crown appeal from stay of proceedings based on pre- charge delay dismissed. Crown's appeal from decision granting accused stay of pro- ceedings based on pre-charge delay was dismissed. Crown appealed. Appeal allowed. Ma- jority agreed substantially with dissenting reasons of appellate level. R. v. Hunt (2017), 2017 Car- swellNf ld 171, 2017 CarswellN- f ld 172, 2017 SCC 25, 2017 CSC 25, Abella J., Moldaver J., Kara- katsanis J., Wagner J., Gascon J., Côté J., and Brown J. (S.C.C.); reversed (2016), 2016 Carswell- Nf ld 425, 2016 NLCA 61, B.G. Welsh J.A., M.H. Rowe J.A., and L.R. Hoegg J.A. (N.L. C.A.). Federal Court of Appeal Tax GOODS AND SERVICES TAX Input tax credits Company not entitled to input tax credits after using false invoices to support claim Company was registrant for purposes of Part IX of Excise Tax Act and operated or claimed to operate gold-trading business consisting essentially in acquir- ing scrap gold for resale to re- finer. During relevant period (April to November 2012), com- pany reported goods and servic- es tax (GST) it collected from its sole client from sale of used gold jewellery and impure gold bars (scrap gold). Minister made as- sessment under Act during rel- evant period, denying company claimed input tax credits (ITCs) of $994,730.97. Company's claim for ITCs was denied on grounds that company did not trade in gold, or alternatively, that it acquired gold from per- sons other than alleged suppli- ers listed on its purchase invoic- es. Minister alleged company knowingly, acting with wilful blindness, participated in false invoicing scheme that allowed clandestine suppliers of gold to sell their gold for cash, which af- forded company opportunity to purchase its gold at substantial discount in relation to its mar- ket value. Minister also con- tended that purchase invoices produced as part of company's documentary evidence did not satisfy requirements set out in paragraph 169(4)(a) of Act and s. 3 of Input Tax Credit Infor- mation (GST/HST) Regulations because they did not identify company's true suppliers. Com- pany's appeal was dismissed by Tax Court of Canada (TCC). TCC concluded company was not entitled to input tax credits claimed for its purchases of gold during period because: invoices company relied on to support its claim were false; and company used these invoices to know- ingly mask identity of its true suppliers. Company appealed. Appeal dismissed. Appeal could not success on issue of burden of proof as it was non-issue. TCC had sufficient evidence to con- clude as it did. It did not, there- fore, commit any error justify- ing intervention. TricomCanada Inc. v. R. (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 1979, 2017 CarswellNat 1980, 2017 FCA 95, 2017 CAF 95, Nadon J.A., Johanne Gauthier J.A., and Trudel J.A. (F.C.A.); affirmed (2016), 2016 CarswellNat 1193, 2016 CarswellNat 46, 2016 TCC 8, 2016 CCI 8, Robert J. Hogan J. (T.C.C. [General Procedure]). Federal Court Criminal Law SENTENCING Types of sentence Parole Board not required to balance Charter values In November 2014, Board re- ceived information from Intelli- gence Unit of Niagara Regional Police Service that VB had been charged with offences pursu- ant to Controlled Drugs and Substances Act ("CDSA") and Criminal Code. Board subse- quently revoked pardon pursu- ant to section 7 of Criminal Re- cords Act ("CRA"). VB brought application seeking judicial review of October 27, 2015 deci- sion by Parole Board of Canada ("Board") made pursuant to CRA to revoke pardon he was previously granted in 2008. Application dismissed. Board's decision was reasonable. Board was not required to conduct bal- ancing of Charter interests or values implicated in revocation of pardon with statutory objec- tives of CRA in absence of any such submissions to the Board from VB. Board was not, in cir- cumstances of case, required to proactively conduct such bal- ancing exercise. Board did not err in applying statutory pro- visions and exercising its dis- cretion to revoke VB's pardon based on information it relied on to determine that VB no lon- ger met good conduct criteria. Buffone v. Canada (At- torney General) (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 1308, 2017 FC 346, Catherine M. Kane J. (F.C.). Ontario Civil Cases Alternative Dispute Resolution JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ARBITRATION AWARDS Grounds for review Arbitrator's breach of obligation to treat party fairly constituting breach of natural justice Parties signed minutes of settle- ment resolving issue of child support for two children. Par- ties agreed to submit subsequent dispute about retroactive and prospective child support to ar- bitration. Eight days before arbi- tration hearing was scheduled, father dismissed lawyer. Arbi- trator refused father's request for adjournment, and father attended arbitration hearing without lawyer. Father applied for judicial review, seeking to have arbitration award set aside. Application granted. Arbitrator considered father's request for adjournment but she did so in relation to whether he intended to appear at hearing and what consequences of not appearing could be, and there was nothing that showed that arbitrator con- sidered father's actual reason for requesting adjournment, that he wanted opportunity to ob- tain new counsel. Arbitrator ap- peared not to have put her mind to whether father was honestly seeking to exercise his right to counsel or whether he was ma- nipulating system to orchestrate delay. This was not case where father had gone though num- ber of lawyers, and there was no logical benefit to him in delaying matter. Father's request for ad- journment was extremely time- ly. Based on evidence, it seemed clear father was honestly seeking his right to legal counsel and he was denied opportunity. Con- sequences of hearing were seri- ous and father was prejudiced by refusal to grant adjournment, while there was no evidence that mother would have been prejudiced by adjournment. In circumstances father was not treated equally and fairly by ar- bitrator, and he was not given opportunity to present his case or respond to mother's case. Ar- bitrator did not balance interests of mother to get on with hear- ing with interests of father to exercise his right to counsel or with interests of administration of justice to ensure matter was decided on its substantive mer- its and that justice was not only done but was seen to be one. Breach of obligation to treat fa- ther fairly and equally pursuant to s. 19 of Arbitration Act con- stituted breach of natural justice, arbitration award must be set aside, and parties were to submit dispute to different arbitrator. Lockman v. Rancourt (2017), 2017 CarswellOnt 5118, 2017 ONSC 2274, Tracy Engelk- ing J. (Ont. S.C.J.). Civil Practice and Procedure COSTS Particular orders as to costs Court proceeding, reopened on basis of fraudulent document, attracting significant costs award Respondent Chief Building Of- ficer revoked building permit issued for construction on appel- lant's property ("revocation or- der"). Appellant appealed revoca- tion order to Superior Court. Ap- peal was dismissed. Parties made submissions as to costs. Respon- dents submitted that appellant had provided fraudulent docu- ment ("Exhibit H") in support of his motion to reopen appeal and had caused respondents consid- erable time and expense in effort CASELAW Caselaw is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please access carswell.com or call 1-800-387-5164. REACH ONE OF THE LARGEST LEGAL AND BUSINESS MARKETS IN CANADA! AVAILABLE ONLINE AND IN PRINT With more than 300,500 page views and 100,000 unique visitors monthly canadianlawlist.com captures your market. FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT Colleen Austin T: 416.649.9327 | E: colleen.austin@thomsonreuters.com www.canadianlawlist.com Get noticed by the lawyers, judges, corporate counsel, finance professionals and other blue chip cilents and prospects who find the contacts they need for Canadian legal expertise at canadianlawlist.com with an Enhanced listing. ENCHANCE YOUR LISTING TODAY! Untitled-4 1 2017-05-18 2:57 PM

• Cover