1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar

Problem Clarifications

Donald G.H. Bowman National Tax Moot

2016 – MOOT PROBLEM CLARIFICATIONS

Issued: JANUARY 8, 2016

Guindon v. The Queen, 2015 SCC 41

January 8, 2016

The following clarifications are hereby issued:

1. “Taxpayer” refers to the Appellant.

2. The taxpayer has appealed to the Bowman Supreme Moot Court for Tax Appeals with respect to the constitutionality of the impugned provision. Her Majesty the Queen has cross-appealed with respect to the notice requirement and Supreme Court of Canada’s exercise of its discretion.

3. The procedural issue is restated as follows:

B. Was the taxpayer required to provide notice of constitutional question in respect of her arguments regarding the nature of the penalty under section 163.2? If so, should the Supreme Court of Canada exercise its discretion to consider such arguments in the absence of the provision of such notice?

4. The parties should not address the question of whether the infringement of section 11 of the Charter (if any) is a limit that is reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under section 1 of the Charter.

5. In their written materials and oral submissions before the Bowman Supreme Moot Court for Tax Appeals, counsel may address the substantive and procedural issues in any order.

6. In respect of the nature of the penalty under section 163.2, the standard of review is correctness. In respect of the requirement to provide notice of constitutional question, the standard of review of correctness. In respect of the Supreme Court of Canada’s exercise of its discretion, the standard of review is reasonableness.