The taxpayer's father transferred real property to her in June 2006 without her knowledge. She discovered the transfer in December 2008 and transferred the property back on 26 February 2009 after obtaining legal advice. Angers J. found that the taxpayer was not liable under s. 160 for her father's unpaid taxes. The common law on property provides that an unwitting recipient of a gift can, as the taxpayer had done, repudiate the gift retroactively (para. 16). There had therefore been no transfer of property, and hence no liability under s. 160. Angers J. also noted that the Court of Appeal's obiter dictum in Biderman, that a failed testamentary gift could not give rise to s. 160 liability, extended to inter vivos gifts (para. 19).
Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
334733
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Leclair v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2011 DTC 1328 [at 1859], 2011 TCC 323",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Leclair v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2011 DTC 1328 [at 1859], 2011 TCC 323",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}