Zaki v. The Queen, 2011 DTC 1004 [at at 18], 2010 TCC 606 (Informal Procedure) -- summary under Evidence

By services, 28 November, 2015

The CRA auditor who handled the taxpayer's reassessment was not available as a witness, so the auditor who had taken over the file testified instead. Hogan J. stated (at para. 23):

In this case, the [Minister] seeks to rely on [the new auditor's] testimony on the basis that he examined [the old auditor's] notes. Even assuming arguendo that Mr. Cudini's notes are indeed admissible under subsection 30(1) of the [Canada Evidence Act], the proper approach would have been to provide notice under subsection 30(7) and then use the notes themselves as evidence.

Moreover, s. 30(10) of the Canada Evidence Act ("CEA") precludes "a record made in the course of an investigation or inquiry" from being introduced as a business record under s. 30(1), so the old auditor's notes were inadmissible: paras. 25-32.

Because the case was heard under informal procedure, the above findings went to weight rather than admissibility (para. 33).

Topics and taglines
Tagline
inappropriate for 2nd auditor to testify based on the 1st auditor's notes
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
332666
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Zaki v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2011 DTC 1004 [at 18], 2010 TCC 606 (Informal Procedure)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}