Précis: This is a decision on a scheduling motion for an examination for discovery. The Crown wanted the schedule to provide for follow-up questions arising out of answers to undertakings. The taxpayer objected on the basis that such questions would amount to a second examination for discovery which cannot be conducted without an order of the Court. The Tax Court found that follow-up questions are inherent in the discovery process and accepted the Crown’s position.
Cuddy v. R - TCC: Discovery timetable to include follow-up questionsREAD MORE »