Counsel for the respondent further contends that paragraph 241(1)(c) of the Act specifically allows the Minister to use confidential information in the administration of the Act. Confidential information may be admissible as evidence if that does not bring the administration of justice into disrepute (see Donovan v. The Queen, 2000 CanLII 17142 (FCA), [2000] 4 F.C. 373). Nonetheless, counsel for the respondent argues that in any event the information could have been obtained through a CCRA audit and that the appellant would have been required to provide it. He therefore contends that the transfer of information was made legally and that in this case it did not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.