Date: 20031126
Docket: A-516-02
Citation: 2003 FCA 455
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
BETWEEN:
LOUIS-PAUL BÉLANGER
Applicant
and
MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Respondent
Hearing held at Québec, Quebec, on November 26, 2003.
Judgment delivered from the bench at Québec, Quebec, on November 26, 2003.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
Date: 20031126
Docket: A-516-02
Citation: 2003 FCA 455
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
BETWEEN:
LOUIS-PAUL BÉLANGER
Applicant
and
MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered from the bench at Québec, Quebec
on November 26, 2003)
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
[1] In our view, this application for judicial review of a decision by a deputy judge of the Tax Court of Canada must be allowed. In this decision, the judge determined that for the period in dispute, the applicant's employment was not insurable employment. We made this finding for the following reason.
[2] The judge did not assume the role assigned to him by the Employment Insurance Act and redefined in the case law by our Court in Pérusse v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue - M.N.R.), [2002] 261 N.R. 150, application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada denied, and Légaré v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue - M.N.R.), [1999] 246 N.R. 176. These judgments were later followed in Valente v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue - M.N.R.), [2003] FCA 132 and Massignani v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue - M.N.R.), [2003] FCA 172.
[3] As this Court stated in Massignani, supra, at paragraph 2, "This role does not allow the judge to substitute his discretion for that of the Minister, but it does encompass the duty to 'verify whether the facts inferred or relied on by the Minister are real and were correctly assessed having regard to the context in which they occurred, and after doing so, . . . decide whether the conclusion with which the Minister was "satisfied" still seems reasonable'".
[4] At paragraph 20 of his decision, the judge recognized that he had the right to examine the facts that were before the Minister in order to "decide if these facts are proven to be correct". But he did not carry out this assessment. He merely stated that "[i]n view of all the circumstances, I am convinced that the appellant did not succeed in establishing, on a preponderance of the evidence, that the Minister acted in a wilful or arbitrary manner". Clearly, he relied on the case law before Pérusse and Légaré, earlier cases which he in fact cited: see paragraph 17 of the decision.
[5] The application for judicial review will be allowed with costs, the decision of the deputy judge set aside and the matter will be referred to the Chief Judge of the Tax Court of Canada or to a judge designated by him, for rehearing.
"Gilles Létourneau"
J.A.
Certified true translation
Kelley A. Harvey, BA, BCL, LLB
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-516-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: LOUIS-PAUL BÉLANGER v. MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
PLACE OF HEARING: QUÉBEC, QUEBEC
DATE OF HEARING: November 26, 2003
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
NADON J.A.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
OF THE COURT:
DATE OF REASONS: NOVEMBER 26, 2003
APPEARANCES:
Marc-André Gravel FOR THE APPLICANT
Janie Payette FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Gravel, Bédard, Vaillancourt FOR THE APPLICANT
Sainte-Foy, Quebec
Department of Justice - Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT
Montréal, Quebec