2023 QCCQ 6081, 2023 QCCQ 6081

Aizenberg c. Agence du revenu du Québec 2023 QCCQ 6081 COURT OF QUEBEC « Administrative and Appeal Division » CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL No : 500-80-043891-234 DATE : September 6, 2023 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING : THE HONOURABLE STÉPHANE DAVIGNON, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ HYMAN MARK AIZENBERG Plaintiff v.

AGENCE DU REVENU DU QUÉBEC Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ON APPLICATION FOR DISMISSAL ______________________________________________________________________ OVERVIEW [ 1 ] The Agence du revenu du Québec (the " Agency ") seeks dismissal of Mr. Aizenberg's motion to institute proceedings entitled "Motion for leave to appeal on the merits", filed in the present proceedings.

It maintains that this recourse is not admissible before the Court under the Tax Administration Act (" TAA ") and that it is doomed to fail. [ 2 ] For the reasons that follow, the Court is of the opinion that Mr. Aizenberg's application must be dismissed. Before turning to the analysis, it is appropriate to place it in its context. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS [ 3 ] On April 4, 2023, Mr. Aizenberg files his application with the Court. Essentially, he alleges that he disagrees with two decisions from the Agency bearing numbers 409267 and 415913.

They respectively concern notice of assessment number QT157219C00 for the year 2020 and number QT062101R00 for the year 2021. [ 4 ] In his application, Mr. Aizenberg alleges more particularly that he disagrees with the Agency's decision to impose upon him the payment of drug insurance premiums under the Quebec Prescription Drug Insurance Plan (the “ Plan ”) provided for in the Act Respecting Prescription Drug [1] (“ ARPD ”).

These premiums are totalling $206.71 for each of the years in question. [ 5 ] Dissatisfied with the answers obtained from the Agency following his representations, he requests the following in his legal action:

a) That an out-of-court conference be held to settle his dispute with the Agency;

b) He refers to collection measures relating to his debts and, in particular, to credits concerning the "Solidarity Tax Credit";

c) He claims that the "Housing Benefit and Cost of Living Tax Credit is "outdated" and proposes "Reimbursement of legal fees and courts fees";

d) He alleges that "leave to appeal" is sought "by reason of Urgency or of the Risk of serious and irreparable harm (...)". [ 6 ] A taxpayer who wishes to contest a notice of assessment after having exhausted his or her administrative recourses with the Agency may apply to the Court of Québec by way of an application to institute proceedings based on

section 93.1.10 of the Tax Administration Act [2] (“ TAA ”). In accordance with

section 93.29, The tribunal may then deny the contestation or quash, vary or refer to the Minister for re-examination, an assessment, decision, determination or allocation of payment. [ 7 ] This provision neither allows the Court to force the Agency to hold an out-of-court settlement conference nor to issue any kind of order in the shape of exempting a taxpayer from the application of various laws, notably the ARPD, which creates a public drug insurance plan and establishes a mandatory contribution based on the taxpayer's income [3] . [ 8 ] The ARPD specifically provides that someone who holds a health insurance card issued by the Régie de l'assurance maladie du Québec is required to be covered either by a private group insurance plan that provides basic prescription drug insurance or the Plan.

Once registered under the Plan, a person must pay an annual premium upon filing his or her income tax return, regardless of whether this person did purchase any medication or not. [ 9 ] In present case, Mr. Aizenberg does not contest the amount of his income for the years in question. He strictly contends that given his low income he should not be required to pay the annual premiums of $206.71 in order to benefit from the Plan. He adds that the

Solidarity Tax Credit and the Housing Benefit and Cost of Living Tax Credit are outdated and should be revised upwards, so that he should benefit from additional income paid by the Government, and ultimately off set the $206.71 premiums per annum. [ 10 ] The Court cannot follow Mr. Aizenberg on this ground. Unfortunately, this is not his first attempt to take advantage of various tax credits or other public programs through the back door, either by contesting the Agency’s assessment notices or by appealing to the Tribunal administratif du Québec.

In a recent decision, Justice Céline Gervais lists all these recourses [4] . It is distressing to note that, despite this, he continues his quest without questioning his strategy. [ 11 ] The scope of

section 93.29 of the TAA does not allow for a recourse such as the one introduced by Mr. Aizenberg. It is not up to the Court to question the choices made by the legislator with regards to the various credits that can be claimed by taxpayers. The contestation of a tax assessment is certainly not the procedural means for attacking the scope of various government programs, including the mandatory provisions of the ARPD and cannot serve as justification for refusing compensation made to ensure payment of insurance premiums under the Plan. On its face, Mr.

Aizenberg’s motion is inadmissible and equally doomed to failure. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT : [ 12 ] DISMISSES Mr. Hyman Mark Aizenberg’s motion to institute proceedings entitled "Motion for leave to appeal on the merits"; [ 13 ] THE WHOLE with legal costs. __________________________________ STÉPHANE DAVIGNON, J.C.Q. Mr. Hyman Mark Aizenberg Non represented Plaintiff Me Judith Kucharsky LARIVIÈRE MEUNIER Counsel for the Defendant Date of hearing : July 12, 2023