Ernest Arthur Werry v. Her Majesty the Queen, [1976] CTC 220, 76 DTC 6118

By services, 24 November, 2022
Is tax content
Tax Content (confirmed)
Citation
Citation name
[1976] CTC 220
Citation name
76 DTC 6118
Decision date
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
664859
Extra import data
{
"field_court_parentheses": "",
"field_external_guid": [],
"field_full_style_of_cause": "Ernest Arthur Werry, Appellant, and Her Majesty the Queen, Respondent.",
"field_import_body_hash": "",
"field_informal_procedure": false,
"field_year_parentheses": "",
"field_source_url": ""
}
Style of cause
Ernest Arthur Werry v. Her Majesty the Queen
Main text

Heald, J (per curiam):—The appellant’s only submission before us was that there should be a new trial. In our view, the appellant has failed to establish any basis upon which we would be justified in ordering a new trial. The onus is on the appellant to establish

(a) that new evidence has been found which could not have been discovered by the appellant by the exercise of reasonable diligence. and (b) that, if adduced, such new evidence would probably, if not almost conclusively, establish facts that would change the result of the previous hearing. (See, for example, KVP Company Limited v McKie, [1949] SCR 698 at 700, and Harding v MMI, [1972] FC 1153 at 1154.)

There is no evidence before us sufficient to meet either one of these requirements. We would add that, in our opinion, the findings of credibility of the learned trial judge were amply justified on the evidence. The appeal must therefore be dismissed with costs.