Case information

Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Self-incrimination — Jarvis motion — Disclosure — Whether Quebec Court of Appeal erred in law in determining that, in context of Jarvis motion, application to obtain log of every person who accessed their tax file, at minimum for period straddling end of penal investigation and start of audit, did not meet relevance test required to order disclosure of evidence — Whether Quebec Court of Appeal erred in law in application of Jarvis framework — Whether Jarvis framework adequately protects constitutional rights of accused persons when supposedly administrative audit starts on basis of penal information.

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.

In 2010, a file was opened in Revenu Québec’s investigations unit concerning the applicants. That investigation was then abandoned. Shortly thereafter, in 2011, Revenu Québec started an audit process pursuant to the powers of inspection granted by the legislation. Audit reports were made and the file was referred to investigations. It was alleged that the applicants used a scheme with the aim of profiting from tax refunds and credits by means of invoices of convenience.

The applicants first sought to obtain supplementary disclosure. That application was allowed in part. In the context of their Jarvis motion, the trial judge established that the separation point between the audit and the investigations was November 8, 2011. Since the audits continued after that point, the judge excluded the evidence obtained after that date. Following the trial, the trial judge convicted the applicants of the offences as charged. The Superior Court found that the trial judge had not erred in his analysis, as did the Court of Appeal.

---

---

---

---