Vulcain Alarme Inc. v. M.N.R.
A-376-98
Létourneau J.A.
11/5/99
12 pp.
Application for judicial review of Tax Court of Canada decision regarding difference between contract of service and contract for services-Whether relationship of subordination exists between parties such that Court must conclude there was contract of employment within meaning of Civil Code of Quebec, art. 2085 or whether between them degree of independence characterizing contract of enterprise or for services, mentioned in Code, art. 2098-Tax Court Deputy Judge properly relied on tests developed by courts on this point (control, ownership of tools, risk of loss, expectation of profit and integration into business), but misapplied them to facts of case at bar-Mr. Blouin, operating under trade name Service Électronique Enr., had since 1965 done inspection work and gauging of toxic substance detectors for plaintiff with latter's customers-As to control, points of fact noted by Trial Judge also consistent with contract of enterprise-Fact Mr. Blouin had to report to plaintiff's premises once a month to get service sheets and so learn list of customers requiring service did not make him employee-Priority in performance of work required of worker not characteristic of contract of employment-Evidence did not disclose plaintiff controlled Mr. Blouin by giving orders and instructions in way his work was to be done-Latter complete master of way in which provided services, except they had to be done within 30 days-No one imposed any control on him or exercised any supervision over his provision of services, and Mr. Blouin set his own schedule-On ownership of tools, Trial Judge recognized Mr. Blouin travelled from one site to another with his own truck to provide inspection services required-However, took as indication of contract of employment fact he was reimbursed for his expenses by plaintiff and inspection of detector done by Mr. Blouin was done using special detector provided by plaintiff-Nothing strange about plaintiff requiring in its contract of enterprise that contractors whose services it employs should use specialized tools it supplies-This single requirement not having effect of transforming contract of enterprise into contract of employment-All facts relating to ownership of tools or equipment tended to show existence of contract of enterprise far more than contract of employment-Same true of degree of integration, risk of loss and expectation of profit-Employment held by Mr. Blouin not insurable employment within meaning of Unemployment Insurance Act during periods at issue-Application allowed-Civil Code of Quebec, S.Q. 1991, c. 64, arts. 2085, 2098-Unemployment Insurance Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. U-1.