| 19(1) | File No. 90M03344 |
| E.E. Campbell | |
| (613) 957-2067 |
March 9, 1990
19(1)
Re: DiFrancesco v M.N.R. 64 DTC 106
The above-noted decision has been referred to in four Tax Appeal Board and Tax Review Board cases. While the case has not been overruled it was not followed in any of the cases.
The cases in question are:
Frappier v M.N.R., 74 DTC 1129
distinguished on the basis of the relationship found to exist in the particular case.
Molot v M.N.R. 77 DTC 111
Referred
Deuck v M.N.R. 81 DTC 177
Referred
Lavoi v M.N.R. 82 DTC 1291
Found to have no application in the particular case.
It is not clear whether you are concerned over the employee and independent contractor relationships. In the DiFrancesco case the Board found an independent contractor relationship. It would depend to a large extent on the facts of a particular case.
Legal expenses are deductible in the course of earning income from a business. Legal expenses are no are not generally deductible in the course of earning employment income, although there is no exception in section 8(1)(f) of the Income Tax Act. This deals with employees involved in real estate sales.
We are attaching a copy of our interpretations bulletin on legal expenses and should you have other questions, please let us know. In summary the DiFrancesco case is still a precedent but probably not a significant one.
Yours sincerely,
C. SavageA/DirectorProvincial and International Relations Division
EEC/sg19(1)Sequence fileAuthor's copyChrono fileReading file