Yourkin v. The Queen, 2014 DTC 1071 [at at 3032], 2014 TCC 48 (Informal Procedure) -- summary under Estoppel

By services, 28 November, 2015

The taxpayer argued that he was not bound by a consent judgment divorce settlement because he had not signed the underlying minutes of settlement, nor authorized his counsel to do the same. Masse DJ stated (at paras. 17-18):

This is not the first time Mr. Yourkin has been before this Court on this very same issue. He unsuccessfully challenged his assessments for his 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006 and 2009 taxation years. In all these prior appeals, the parties were the same, the issues were exactly the same, and the facts relied upon were the same except for the taxation years and perhaps the amount in dispute. ...

Whether one looks at this situation through the lens of res judicata or issue estoppel, the result is the same. ... The matter has been finally decided.

Topics and taglines
Tagline
taxpayer's seventh collateral attack on the same consent judgment
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
332545
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Yourkin v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2014 DTC 1071 [at 3032], 2014 TCC 48 (Informal Procedure) <strong>[taxpayer's seventh collateral attack on the same consent judgment]</strong>",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}