Richard Lewin Re: The J.J. Herbert Family Trust #1 v. The Queen, 2011 DTC 1354 [at at 1979], 2011 TCC 476, aff'd 2013 DTC 5006 [at 5525], 2012 FCA 279 [but overridden by s. 214(3)(f)(i)(C)] -- summary under Expressio Unius est Exclusio Alterius

By services, 28 November, 2015

Bédard J. found that, because s. 227(5) only applied to an amount which was paid rather than (as under s. 212(1)) to an amount which was paid or credited, it should not be applied to a situation where a trustee had credited (but not yet paid) an amount to a non-resident beneficiary - although, in any event, on the facts before the Court, the amount in question had not been credited. Bédard J. stated (at para. 64):

The Latin maxim "expressio unius est exclusio alterius", also known as the principle of implied exclusion, states that where the legislator causes a provision to apply to a number of categories but fails to include one that that could easily have been included, one may infer that the legislator intended to exclude that category from the application of the provision.

d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
340069
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Lewin v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2011 DTC 1354 [at 1979], 2011 TCC 476",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}