Canada v. Gibson, 2002 DTC 6724, 2001 FCA 356

By services, 28 November, 2015
Is tax content
Tax Content (confirmed)
Citation
Citation name
2002 DTC 6724
Citation name
2001 FCA 356
Decision date
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
354294
Extra import data
{
"field_court_parentheses": "",
"field_external_guid": [
"url::decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/34845/index"
],
"field_full_style_of_cause": "",
"field_import_body_hash": "86f5200dbaca049825861e1ac807e4e7a23e4e51edec6fe982d8f0f05f69b22c",
"field_informal_procedure": false,
"field_year_parentheses": "",
"field_source_url": {
"url": "https://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/34845/index.do",
"title": "",
"attributes": [],
"original_title": "",
"original_url": "https://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/34845/index.do"
}
}
Style of cause
Canada v. Gibson
Main text

Date: 20011121

Docket: A-755-00

Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 356

CORAM: STRAYER J.A.

ROTHSTEIN J.A.

SHARLOW J.A.

BETWEEN:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Applicant

and

BETH GIBSON

Respondent

Heard at Winnipeg, Manitoba, on November 21, 2001

Judgment delivered at Winnipeg, Manitoba, on November 21, 2001

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: ROTHSTEIN J.A.


Date: 20011121

Docket: A-755-00

Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 356

CORAM: STRAYER J.A.

ROTHSTEIN J.A.

SHARLOW J.A.

BETWEEN:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Applicant

and

BETH GIBSON

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

ROTHSTEIN J.A.

[1] This is an application by the Minister of National Revenue for judicial review of a decision of the Tax Court under the informal procedure allowing the respondent a tax credit under paragraph 118.2(2)(l.2) of the Income Tax Act for the cost of renovations to her dwelling required to install a whirlpool spa. The cost of the spa itself did not qualify for any medical expense credit.


[2] The reasons for decision of the Tax Court Judge stressed the difficulties the respondent experienced in performing her work as a teacher. The extent to which the Tax Court Judge referred to that question led the applicant to argue that the Tax Court Judge was misinterpreting paragraph 118.2(2)(l.2). We agree with the applicant that the availability of a tax credit under paragraph 118.2(2)(l.2) is not predicated on an individual's difficulty in working, but rather on the ability of an individual to be mobile or functional within a dwelling. However, we are satisfied that there was evidence before the Tax Court Judge that the respondent had a severe and prolonged mobility impairment and that the alterations to her dwelling enabled her to be functional within the dwelling.

[3] The application for judicial review will be dismissed.

"Marshall Rothstein"

J.A.

Winnipeg, Manitoba

November 21, 2001


FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET: A-755-00

STYLE OF CAUSE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN v. BETH GIBSON

PLACE OF HEARING: Winnipeg, Manitoba

DATE OF HEARING: November 21, 2001

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT : ROTHSTEIN J.A.

DATED: November 21, 2001

APPEARANCES:

Tracey Harwood-Jones FOR THE APPLICANT

Department of Justice

301 - 310 Broadway

Winnipeg, MB R3C 0S6

Barbara Shields FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Morris Rosenberg

Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE APPLICANT

Aikins MacAulay & Thorvaldson FOR THE RESPONDENT

30th Floor, 360 Main Street

Winnipeg, MB R3C 4G1

Docket
A-755-00