http://decision.tcc-cci.gc.ca/tcc-cci/decisions/en/item/66838/index.do 
Yourkin v. The Queen[1] (February 13, 2014) was a case involving a self-represented litigant. He and his former wife separated in 1994 and reached agreement on equalization of property in 1997. That agreement was incorporated into the terms of a judgment of the Ontario Court (General Division). Part of the agreement was that his pension would be split in two parts, one for his wife and one for him. She received her pension directly from the plan. He had no connection with her pension and did not report it as income. In 2011 he claimed her share of the pension as a spousal support deduction.
The appellant’s theory was of the sort often raised by self-represented taxpayers:
[7] The Appellant takes the position that the Judgment of Walsh, J., dated January 13, 1997 is not binding on him because he did not sign the underlying Minutes of Settlement which is the foundation of the Judgment; nor did he authorize his counsel at the time to sign the Minutes on his behalf. He is of the view that the Order of O’Connell J., dated April 18, 1995 governs in the circumstances and any monies that were paid to his former spouse during the taxation year represents spousal support payments for which he is entitled to claim a deduction from income.
Mr. Yourkin had raised the same issue unsuccessfully in Tax Court appeals in each of his 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006 and 2009 taxation years.
It is a tribute to the courtesy and patience of the trial judge that he took 28 paragraphs to dismiss the appeal with costs.
[1] 2014 TCC 48.