In Canada v. General Electric Capital Canada Inc., 2010 FCA 92 (CanLII), the Crown “requested the right to produce a memorandum of fact and law that exceeds the thirty page limit set out in subrule 70(4) of the Federal Court Rules, S.O.R./98-106.” Request granted.
“ The appellant moves for an order permitting it to file a memorandum of fact and law that exceeds the thirty page limit set out in subrule 70(4) of the Federal Court Rules, S.O.R./98-106.
 The appellant wishes to file a memorandum that is fifty-five pages long. The respondent consents to the relief sought.Although this motion is proceeding on consent, this court must still consider whether to exercise its discretion in favour of granting this relief.
 The appellant submits that this appeal “raises important and complicated questions.” The appellant also cites the length of the trial and the large number of witnesses in the court below. The appellant says that its factum, almost double the normal page limit, will “assist the Court” and “will allow for a shorter oral hearing than would otherwise be required.”
 In this appeal, the appellant raises three grounds of appeal: errors of law, reviewable errors in the trial judge’s fact-finding, and denials of procedural fairness. These alleged errors, the appellant says, have “many facets, all requiring explanation, examples and a summary of the law in the relevant area.” Further, the appellant suggests that the alleged denials of procedural fairness must be illustrated using lengthy excerpts from trial transcripts.
 In considering the appellant’s motion, I took into account a number of factors: […]”
DRTP Consulting Inc. solutions go beyond transfer pricing and international tax solutions. This blog post originally appeared at rbrt.ca. The information in this blog post is general information only. Data and information come from sources believed to be reliable but complete accuracy cannot be guaranteed. DRTP Consulting Inc. or the author are not responsible or liable for any error, omission or inaccuracy in such information. Readers should seek advice and counsel from DRTP Consulting Inc. as required.
- Posted by Robert Robillard
- On 28 May 2014
- 0 Comments
- Arm's length principle, Canadian Income Tax Act, Guarantee fees, IC 87-2R International Transfer Pricing-Prix de transfert international, Intragroup services, Jurisprudence, Loi de l'impôt sur le revenu du Canada, OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, Principe de pleine concurrence, Principes de l'OCDE en prix de transfert, Prix de transfert Canada, Section 247, Tax case, Transfer Pricing Canada