Taxpayers made request for adjournment of proceeding in Tax Court because they claimed that their representative had only become aware of trial date recently – Hearing coordinator refused request for adjournment. Taxpayers asked Associate Chief Justice of Tax to reconsider refusal of adjournment. In Federal Court of Appeal, taxpayers brought motion to appeal Tax Court’s decision to refuse request for postponement and sought order under R. 55 of Federal Courts Rules that dispensed with R. 341, 343 and 348 so that it could be heard by one judge, and order under R. 8 expediting hearing of appeal. MOTION DISMISSED. Court had no authority to dispense with compliance with three-judge requirement established by Parliament. It was inappropriate to dispense with Rules and expedite hearing as taxpayers proposed, as to proceed into hearing as proposed by taxpayers would not be orderly or fair to parties or court.
6260268 Canada Inc. v. Construction GMR Inc. (2018), 2018 CarswellNat 1412, 2018 FCA 70, J.B. Laskin J.A. (F.C.A.).