Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20030211

Docket: A-262-01

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 73

CORAM:        RICHARD C.J.

DESJARDINS J.A.

ROTHSTEIN J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                                      JO-ANN ELKE

and

STEVEN HISCOCK

                                                                                                                                                      Applicants

                                                                                 and

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                              Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, February 11, 2003

                       Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, February 11, 2003

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                             DESJARDINS J.A.


Date: 20030211

Docket: A-262-01

Neutral citation: 2003 FCA 73

CORAM:        RICHARD C.J.

DESJARDINS J.A.

ROTHSTEIN J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                                      JO-ANN ELKE

and

STEVEN HISCOCK

                                                                                                                                                      Applicants

                                                                                 and

                                                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                       REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

                                           (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario

                                                                on February 11, 2003)

DESJARDINS J.A.

[1]                 Since Bowman A.C.J. rendered his judgment against the applicants on March 15, 2001, the Supreme Court of Canada has issued its decision in the case of Stewart v. Canada, 2002 SCC 46, [2002] S.C.J. No. 46 (QL).

[2]                 Both parties agree that the decision of Bowman A.C.J. should be set aside on that basis.

[3]                 What remains to be decided is the issue of quantum of expenses to be deducted.


[4]                 Considering that Bowman A.C.J. made no finding on this issue, the matter will be returned to him for a determination of this issue. Additional evidence may be adduced by the parties in this regard. The applicants will be entitled to their costs in this Court.

[5]                 The application for judicial review will therefore be allowed, the decision of Bowman A.C.J. will be set aside and the matter will be remitted to Bowman A.C.J. to determine, after receipt of such further evidence as the parties may elect to present, the quantum of deductions of expenses. The whole with costs to the applicants in this Court.

   

"Alice Desjardins"

line

J.A.


                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

    

DOCKET:                                             A-262-01

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           Jo-Ann Elke and Steven Hiscock v. Her Majesty the Queen

  

PLACE OF HEARING:                     Ottawa, Ontario

  

DATE OF HEARING:                       February 11, 2003

  

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: (Richard C.J., Desjardins & Rothstein JJ.A.)

  

RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Desjardins J.A.     

   

APPEARANCES:

Mr. Emilio Binavince and Ms. Helen Lanctôt                               FOR THE APPLICANTS

Mr. Roger Leclaire                                 FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Binavince Smith

Ottawa, Ontario                                     FOR THE APPLICANTS

Mr. Morris Rosenberg

Deputy Attorney General of Canada             FOR THE RESPONDENT

 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.