Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Taxation - Income tax - Evasion - Defences - Applicant charged with income tax evasion - Applicant claiming that he did not pay income tax because he believed that Income Tax Act did not apply to him as “natural person” - Applicant’s mistake constituting mistake of law which did not afford defence to charge of income tax evasion - Trial judge erred in instructing the jury regarding the defence that the Applicant was a tax protestor or that he mistakeningly believed the Act did not apply to him - New trial ordered - Whether the Court of Appeal erroneously reversed the onus on the issue of intent on s. 239(1)(d) of the Act - Whether the Court of Appeal erroneously misstated the law regarding mens rea on s. 239(1)(d) of the Act - Whether the Court of Appeal erroneously ignored evidence which was before the jury by which they could have validly based their verdict of not guilty - Whether there are issues of public importance raised.

The Applicant, Dr. or Mr. Klundert, an optometrist, was charged with income tax evasion. By indictment dated July 5, 2001, it was alleged that Mr. Klundert did willfully evade or attempt to evade the payment of $348,231.15 in taxes imposed upon him by the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, (5th Supp.), c. 1, by failing to report income in the amounts of $272,910, $270,403, $434,931, $254,520, and $272,910 for the taxation years 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 respectively. On June 2006, before a court composed of judge and jury, Mr. Klundert was acquitted on the charge of income tax evasion. The Crown appealed the acquittal of Mr. Klundert after his re-trial on a charge of income tax evasion, pursuant to s. 239(1)(d) of the Act. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the acquittal and ordered a new trial.