http://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/135292/index.do
Porotti v. Canada (National Revenue) (January 27, 2016 – 2016 FCA 29, Pelletier, De Montigny (author), Gleason JJ. A.).
Précis: The Tax Court concluded that Ms. Porotti was not engaged in insurable and pensionable employment. The Federal Court of Appeal found no reversible error and dismissed the appeal with costs.
Decision: Unfortunately for Ms. Porotti the Federal Court of Appeal found no basis for reversing the Tax Court decision that she was not engaged in insurable and pensionable employment:
[2] Despite Ms. Porotti’s able arguments, I have not been convinced that the Tax Court judge erred in coming to her conclusion. She identified the correct legal test as set out by this Court in 1392644 Ontario Inc. O/A Connor Homes v. The Minister of National Revenue, 2013 FCA 85, and made no palpable and overriding errors in applying it to the facts of this case.
[3] Having regard to the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses, the Tax Court judge could properly find that the parties’ intention was that the appellant be engaged as an independent contractor, and that the usual objective factors are consistent with such a finding.
As a result the appeal was dismissed with costs.