Johnston v. The Queen, 2012 DTC 1175 [at at 3437], 2012 TCC 177 (Informal Procedure) -- summary under Paragraph 118.2(2)(l.2)

By services, 28 November, 2015

The taxpayer installed a hot tub to be used as a hydrotherapy pool for her daughter, who had cerebral palsy-related spastic quadriplegia and other conditions. Boyle J. found that the installation was excluded under s. 118.2(2)(l.2) from qualifying for a medical expense tax credit. Although subparagraph (i) did not apply (it was generally accepted that a hot tub, like a pool, will tend to limit the available market for a property and therefore not increase the value of the dwelling), subparagraph (ii) did. Boyle J. stated (at para. 12):

I must take judicial notice that many fully able bodied Canadians put similar hot tubs in their homes and yards. In my opinion, a typical hot tub generally available in the retail market such as the Johnstons' is not able to satisfy this final requirement.

Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
333594
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<a id=\"Johnston\"></a><strong><em>Johnston v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2012 DTC 1175 [at 3437], 2012 TCC 177 (Informal Procedure)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}