Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20030307

Docket: A-558-02

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 124

Present:           The Honourable Justice Sharlow

BETWEEN:

                                                            JOHN DAVID HERRING

                                                                                                                                                       Appellant

                                                                                 and

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                                                   

                                            Dealt with in writing without appearance of parties

                                          Order delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, March 7, 2003

REASONS FOR ORDER BY:                                                                                         SHARLOW J.A.


Date: 20030307

Docket: A-558-02

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 124

Present:           The Honourable Justice Sharlow

BETWEEN:

                                                            JOHN DAVID HERRING

                                                                                                                                                       Appellant

                                                                                 and

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                            REASONS FOR ORDER

Sharlow J.A.

[1]                 The appellant has appealed a judgment of the Tax Court: Herring v. Canada, 2002 D.T.C. 2153 (T.C.C.). It appears that a critical issue in the appeal was whether a certain business was carried on by a corporation, or by the appellant in partnership. The appellant seeks to present, as evidence on appeal, a document purporting to be a certificate dated December 16, 2002, signed by Harriet Smith Windsor, which reads as follows:

  

     I, HARRIET SMITH WINDSOR, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT A THOROUGH SEARCH OF THE CORPORATION RECORDS OF THIS DEPARTMENT INDICATE THE "COMBAT INDUSTRIAL BATTERIES & CHARGERS INC.", IS NOT THE TITLE OF A DELAWARE CORPORATION OR FOREIGN CORPORATION.

     AND I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE FAIL TO SHOW THAT A CORPORATION OF THE ABOVE TITLE HAS EVER FILED A CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OR QUALIFIED AS A FOREIGN CORPORATION IN THIS DEPARTMENT.

[2]                 Counsel for the appellant says, and I accept, that it was not until after the conclusion of the Tax Court trial that he learned that it was possible to obtain a certificate from the State of Delaware to the effect that a corporation with a certain name had not been incorporated there. He also says that the Crown's pleadings do not allege that the corporation carrying on the business in question was a Delaware corporation named Combat Industrial Batteries & Chargers Inc.

[3]                 Counsel for the respondent does not say that its pleadings identified the corporation. However, she points out there was documentary evidence in the Tax Court that the corporation carrying on the business in question was a Delaware corporation named Combat Industrial Batteries & Chargers Inc. I note that there were also other documents stating different corporate names. In the normal course, all of those documents would have been disclosed to the appellant in pre-trial discovery proceedings.


[4]                 I conclude, based on the material before me, that counsel for the appellant should have been aware prior to the trial that there would be an issue as to the existence of a Delaware corporation named Combat Industrial Batteries & Chargers Inc. which carried on the business in question. It seems to me that with due diligence, he could have made the enquiries that would have led him to obtain the certificate before trial.

[5]                 For these reasons, the motion to present evidence on appeal will be dismissed.

   

"K. Sharlow"

line

J.A.


                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

    

DOCKET:                                             A-558-02

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           JOHN DAVID HERRING and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                   

DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

REASONS FOR ORDER :             SHARLOW J.A.

DATED:                                                MARCH 7, 2003

  

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:

John David Buote                                                                           FOR THE APPELLANT

Eleanor H. Thorn                                                                            FOR THE RESPONDENT

  

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

John David Buote

Barrister and Solicitor

Brampton, Ontario                                                                          FOR THE APPELLANT

Morris Rosenberg                                                                           FOR THE RESPONDENT

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.