Thus, it appears that, under the doctrine propounded in Fasken, St. Aubyn and Dunkelman that in order for there to be a transfer of property for the purposes of the attribution rules, it is indispensable that the transferor relinquish his ownership and that the property pass to the transferee. Mere possession of property does not satisfy this condition because a transfer “is a juridical act the consequence of which is the transfer of the ownership of the property which is the subject of the transfer. In other words, the transferred property changes patrimonies. The property leaves the patrimony of the transferor to become part of the patrimony of the transferee . . .” (see Doucet v. The Queen, 2007 D.T.C. 1029 at paragraphs 23-24).
"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.