Does issue (ii) have to be addressed?

Having decided that the income herein is income from a property, issue (ii) does not have to be addressed. However, it should be noted that Strayer J., as he then was, in Canada v. Adelman, 1993FCJ776, when dealing with a different election than herein but nevertheless one that conferred on a taxpayer the right to take advantage of a provision, said in paragraph 12 thereof: ... It seems neither unjust nor unreasonable, nor in any way inconsistent with the Act or the Regulations, for a taxpayer to be required to adhere strictly to the procedure prescribed by the law for the exercise of this right having regard to the fact that its exercise will affect his position and that of the Minister ...