Boyle J. found that the distinction in s. 118 that allows taxpayers of 65 years and older to split all pension income with a spouse, but restricts taxpayers younger than 65 years to splitting only qualified pension income, did not contravene s. 15(1) of the Charter. He found at para. 16 that the 65-year cutoff was meant to essentially reserve for retirees a particular retirement-related tax advantage. As per Gosselin, 2002 SCC 84 at para. 57, if the age chosen was "reasonably related to the legislative goal" then that would suggest that the age-based distinction did not amount to discrimination under the Charter.
Boyle J. at para. 7 also dismissed arguments made under the Canadian Human Rights Act on the grounds that the Tax Court had no jurisdiction to hear complaints under that statute.