http://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/181536/index.do#
Muller v. Canada (October 24, 2016 – 2016 FCA 260, Nadon (author), Gauthier, Trudel JJ. A.).
Précis: Mr. Justice de Montigny of the Federal Court (as he then was) in a decision dated March 2, 2015 (2015 FC 262) refused to set aside an ex parte warrant permitting the search of computer records found in the appellant’s house. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal from the bench. Neither side sought costs so no costs order was issued.
Decision: The appeal was dismissed from the bench:
[1] This is an appeal from a decision of Mr. Justice de Montigny of the Federal Court (as he then was) dated March 2, 2015 (2015 FC 262) wherein he dismissed the appellant’s motion which sought to set aside an order and warrant issued ex parte by the Federal Court on October 3, 2011, as amended on July 17, 2012, which allowed the respondent to inspect the contents of computers, seized in the appellant’s home, for the purposes of tax collection and audit.
[2] We have not been persuaded that, in so concluding, Mr. Justice de Montigny made a reviewable error. More particularly, it is our view that he correctly interpreted subsections 231.1(1) and (3) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.) as allowing the inspection and examination of electronic records held by a taxpayer.
There was no order as to costs since neither party sought costs.