It was likely proposed representative would have to appear as both advocate and witness

Representation. Registrant appealed assessment regarding unreported GST/HST, disallowed input tax credits and imposition of gross negligence penalties. At time notice of appeal was filed, registrant was represented by counsel, but counsel had since filed notice of intention to cease to act. Registrant brought motion for leave to have sole director and officer represent it on appeal. Motion dismissed. Registrant must be represented by counsel. Subsection 17.1(1) of Tax Court of Canada Act did not allow corporations to appear in person. While there appeared to be legislative intent to address situations involving corporations and who may represent them with respect to Rule 30(2) of Tax Court Rules, there was no similar legislative intent with respect to s. 17.1(1) of Act. Subsection 17.1(1) of Act could not be interpreted to implicitly state that corporation, like individual, may appear in person, without express words to that effect. While proposed representative, as sole director, officer and shareholder, appeared to be duly authorized by registrant to act as its representative and had connection to registrant, there was no evidence of registrant’s financial situation, it was likely proposed representative would have to appear as both advocate and witness and he would not be able to represent registrant in terms of adequately bringing forth evidence and dealing with law.

1532099 Ontario Ltd. v. The Queen (2020), 2020 CarswellNat 385, 2020 TCC 30, Susan Wong J. (T.C.C. [General Procedure]).

Case Law 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 visit store.thomsonreuters.ca