Mr Taxman - not Senor

"Hurry up and wait."  This describes what litigation lawyers do in court.  We hurry to get to court on time, only to wait for the other cases to complete before it is our turn.  I don't often pay attention to the other cases, but I have some sympathy for the fact that parties are paying good money to be there.  Fortunately, there are rare moments where we sit back and laugh at the comedy that unfolds before us.

In the news last month, I read the story of a Calgary businessman who tried to pay his taxes in Colombian pesos.  He owed $110,000 and argued that the dollar symbol on his tax notice had one line through the "S" and, therefore, indicated pesos, not dollars. His argument was that a proper dollar symbol has two lines through the "S". (110,000 Colombian pesos is about $75 Canadian.)  Not surprisingly, the judge ruled against the creative businessman.

You might think that this case is unique and that nobody else would be so unrealistic to think that this argument could succeed. Not so!  In fact, while I was in court last March, a local businessman was trying the same trick.  He had brought 75,000 Mexican pesos to the town office to pay property taxes.  Predictably, the taxman said "No" and proceeded to enforce the debt.  The person then tried to get a court to declare that he owed nothing, because, the argument ran, he got a bill in pesos, he offered to pay in pesos, the municipality would not take the money, which means that he must not owe anything.

The judge tossed him out of court on a technicality, but you never know...he may try again!

These cases usually produce the predicted result: the wacky argument loses.  As ridiculous as they may seem, they also teach as a valuable lesson about the courts: no matter how logical or creative or persuasive your argument may be, the judge is likely to make the "right" decision, even if you think the law is on your side.

Lawyers (and, to a lesser extent, clients) sometimes get caught up in the attraction of a technical argument to try to win their case.  Usually, these arguments show creativity and insightful analysis of the law.  These arguments can have excellent logic and be very persuasive. Sometimes, these arguments lead to a potential result that, while logical and consistent with the law, seems obviously unfair.

These cases are difficult for judges.  Judges must uphold the law, but they also feel a need to give the right decision on the facts.  So, a judge may make the right decision and then blanket that decision in some sort of reasoning to justify the result.  The losing party is then faced with taking the loss or appealing.  Of course, an appeal is not likely to succeed, as the judge would be careful enough to try to make the decision appeal?proof.

Hopefully, the lawyer will have warned their client at the start that their position was technical and there was a distinct possibility of losing, despite the fact that the law may have been on their side.  In such cases, we tell our clients: "It was a longshot, but we tried and lost."