Mr Tarracino ran a business called “Doctor Tax”. This business advertised itself as a tax preparation and advisory service. Mr Tarracino had however previous convictions for tax evasion as a result of him fraudulently preparing his clients’ tax returns. This conviction ended up with Mr Tarracino being sentenced to three years prison.
The Thelwells ran a small courier business. In 2007 they were pursued by the Canada Revenue Agency and appealed against a decision made by this authority. The Thelwells instructed Mr Tarracino and Mr Tindall to represent their appeals before the Tax Court of Canada. Mr Tindall had no legal training.
Although it would be pure supposition to consider the likely outcome of the hearing, it is not disputed that the Thelwells did not receive the best representation. Indeed Boyle J commented that Mr Tindall did not seem to understand basic principles of litigation and his previous employment was in an unrelated area. Furthermore Boyle J also stated that “just because one holds oneself out as a tax professional does not make it so”.
Nevertheless Boyle J pointed out that parties are free to choose who they are represented by and any [poor] choice made by a party would be down to them.
The Thelwells went on to lose their appeal. This was a costly mistake for them by choosing a “Doctor” to undertake an accountant’s and solicitor’s role.