Swirsky v. Canada, 2014 DTC 5037 [at at 6723], 2014 FCA 36, aff'g 2013 TCC 73, 2013 DTC 1078 [at 431] -- summary under Onus

By services, 28 November, 2015

The trial judge found (at para. 71) that as the Minister had not applied GAAR until the confirmation stage, the Minister was required to show that the primary purpose of the share dispositions in issue was to obtain a tax benefit.

In the course of affirming the decision, Dawson JA explicitly declined to adopt para. 71 of the trial judge's reasons [ed: see Anchor Pointe].

Topics and taglines
Topic
General Concepts - Onus
Tagline
applying GAAR at confirmation stage doesn't shift onus
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
332893
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<a id=\"Swirsky\"></a><strong><em>Swirsky v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2014 DTC 5037 [at 6723], 2014 FCA 36, aff'g 2013 TCC 73, 2013 DTC 1078 [at 431] <strong>[applying GAAR at confirmation stage doesn't shift onus]</strong>",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": ""
}