Background
Brett Russell appealed an assessment under section 160 of the Income Tax Act. After the Crown successfully moved in 2024 to strike his original notice of appeal with leave to amend, Russell filed an amended notice alleging, among other things, that the Canada Revenue Agency had acted unfairly, employed disproportionate enforcement measures, impaired his access to justice, and infringed his rights under sections 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The amended pleading also sought a declaration that the CRA had breached procedural fairness and natural justice. Alternatively, Russell requested recommendations or directions concerning collection of any resulting liability, including an enforcement stay, structured payment terms, and interest-free treatment. The Crown moved under section 53 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) to strike those allegations and requested remedies without leave to amend because they disclosed no reasonable grounds for appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The Tax Court granted the Crown’s motion in full. It held that a tax appeal concerns the validity and correctness of the assessment—not the conduct of CRA officials or the process by which the assessment was established. Allegations about unfair enforcement, procedural unfairness, abuse of process, and unequal treatment therefore fell outside the issues the Court could decide in this appeal.
The Court also struck the Charter allegations. An income tax assessment is a civil matter involving economic interests and does not engage section 7’s protection of life, liberty, or security of the person, while the pleaded section 15 claim concerned the Minister’s administrative conduct as tax collector and was outside the Tax Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. Finally, subsection 171(1) permits the Court to dismiss an appeal, vacate or vary an assessment, or refer it back for reconsideration and reassessment; it does not authorize the declarations, collection recommendations, or payment-related relief Russell sought.
Paragraphs 14, 15, 16, and 26 and subparagraphs 2(b), 2(c), 2(d), 31(b), and 31(c) were struck. Russell was directed, if he intended to continue the appeal, to file and serve within 15 days a further amended notice containing no new provisions and removing the struck material. The Court awarded no costs unless Russell failed to comply with the order’s filing or notification requirements and the Crown requested costs.
Key Takeaways
- The Tax Court’s role in an income tax appeal is to determine whether the assessment is valid and correct, not to review alleged misconduct by CRA officials.
- Broad Charter allegations cannot survive a motion to strike when they concern only economic interests or administrative collection conduct and lack material facts capable of establishing a viable claim.
- The remedies available under subsection 171(1) do not include declarations about CRA conduct or recommendations governing collection stays, payment arrangements, or interest relief.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces the jurisdictional boundary between challenging the correctness of a tax assessment and seeking relief for alleged unfairness in the CRA’s administrative or collection conduct. Tax Court pleadings must connect their material facts and requested relief to whether tax was properly assessed.
Taxpayers cannot convert complaints about enforcement tactics or procedural treatment into grounds for vacating an assessment merely by framing them as fairness, common-law, or Charter claims. Such allegations may require pursuit in another court or process, while the Tax Court appeal remains focused on the assessment itself.