Kiperchuk v. The Queen, 2013 DTC 1088 [at at 486], 2013 TCC 60 -- summary under Paragraph 251(1)(a)

By services, 28 November, 2015

The taxpayer was the designated beneficiary of her husband's RRSP, and received the RRSP proceeds upon his death, and was assessed for his unpaid taxes under s. 160. Before going on to find that this transfer also was not a non-arm's length one under s. 251(1)(b) or (c), Lamarre J found that the taxpayer and her husband were not related persons under s. 251(1)(a) at the time of transfer because their marriage was dissolved on the husband's death, so that at the time of transfer they were not related by marriage under s. 251(2)(a). As the transfer to the taxpayer was an arm's length one, s. 160(1) did not apply.

Topics and taglines
Tagline
taxpayer was not related to her deceased husband
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
337499
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Kiperchuk v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2013 DTC 1088 [at 486], 2013 TCC 60",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}