Federal Court Upholds Relevance Standard for Discovery Questions
📌 In brief
The Federal Court of Appeal ruled that questions asked during discovery must be relevant to the issues being disputed. In this case, the Tax Court had determined that some questions were not relevant, and the Federal Court of Appeal agreed with this assessment.
⚖️ Legal holding
Questions asked during discovery must be relevant to the issues raised in the appeal.
📖 What the law says
This rule states that the Minister must promptly review a taxpayer's income tax return for a given year. The Minister then calculates the tax owed, any interest or penalties, and determines if the taxpayer is due a refund or if certain amounts are considered paid towards their tax.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tax Court's ruling on the relevance of questions during discovery.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal challenging the Tax Court’s ruling that certain questions asked during discovery were irrelevant to the issues raised in the appeal. The Court affirmed the Tax Court's application of the relevant legal test.
📚 Full judgment Official document
Date: 20260527 Docket: A-260-25 Citation: 2026 FCA 103 CORAM: LEBLANC J.A. [NAME] J.A. PAMEL J.A. BETWEEN: [COMPANY]. Appellant and HIS [NAME] THE [NAME] Respondent Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on May 27, 2026. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on May 27, 2026.
REASONS FOR
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: [NAME] J.A. Date: 20260527 Docket: A-260-25 Citation: 2026 FCA 103 CORAM: LEBLANC J.A. [NAME] J.A. PAMEL J.A. BETWEEN: [COMPANY]. Appellant And HIS [NAME] THE [NAME] Respondent
REASONS FOR
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on May 27, 2026). [NAME] J.A. [ 1 ] [COMPANY]. appeals an interlocutory order of the Tax Court of Canada that dismissed its motion to compel the Canada Revenue Agency to answer two questions on discovery: 2025 TCC 95. [ 2 ] Since the determination of whether questions and related undertakings are permissible is a fact-based inquiry, this Court can only intervene if the Tax Court committed a palpable and overriding error or an extricable error of law: [COMPANY]. v. Canada , 2019 FCA 19 at paras. 24–25; 684761 [COMPANY]. v. Canada , 2015 FCA 123 at para. 3, citing Canada v. [COMPANY], 2011 FCA 120 at paras. 24 - 25 and other decisions. [ 3 ] The Tax Court applied the well-known legal test from [COMPANY] (at para. 34) and Rule 95 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) , S.O.R./90-688a, to determine whether the questions were relevant. Applying that test, it found the two questions to be irrelevant to the issues raised by Brant in its appeal. The Tax Court provided detailed reasons for its findings. [ 4 ] Brant has not persuaded us that the Tax Court made a reviewable error in dismissing the motion. In particular, Brant has not persuaded us that the Tax Court misapplied the [COMPANY] test. We will therefore dismiss the appeal with costs. " [NAME] " J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-260-25 STYLE OF CAUSE: [COMPANY]. v. HIS [NAME] THE [NAME] OF HEARING: VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA DATE OF HEARING: May 27, 2026
REASONS FOR
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LEBLANC J.A. [NAME] J.A. PAMEL J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: [NAME] J.A. APPEARANCES : [NAME] For The Appellant [NAME] J. Sigouin FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD : [COMPANY], British Columbia For The Appellant Marie-Josée Hogue Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The Tax Court applied the well-known legal test from a company and Rule 95 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) to determine whether the questions were relevant.
- The Tax Court found the two questions to be irrelevant to the issues raised by the appellant in its appeal.
- The Tax Court provided detailed reasons for its findings.
- The appellant has not persuaded the court that the Tax Court made a reviewable error in dismissing the motion.
- The appellant has not persuaded the court that the Tax Court misapplied the legal test.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Federal Court of Appeal decided to uphold the Tax Court's ruling that certain questions asked during discovery were irrelevant to the issues raised in the appeal.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether certain questions asked during discovery were relevant to the issues raised in the appeal.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to uphold the Tax Court's ruling because the questions were deemed irrelevant to the issues raised in the appeal.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Income Tax Act, section 152, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the relevance of the questions asked during discovery to the issues raised in the appeal.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that any questions asked during discovery are directly relevant to the issues being disputed.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents that mattered.