A member of the taxpayer was entitled in her position to a per diem payment but the number of days she worked was not fixed or ascertainable in advance, which led the Tax Court below to conclude that the member had not received a fixed or ascertainable stipend or remuneration, as stipulated in the s. 248(1) definition of "office." The Court disagreed and granted the Minister's appeal. Stratas J.A. stated (at para. 5):
[I]n our view, the phrase "the position ... [must be one] entitling" the individual to "stipend or remuneration," means nothing more than a position for pay: Vachon Estate v. Canada, [2010 DTC 5038], 2009 FCA 375 at paragraphs 38-43.