How Al Meghji became one of Canada's most trusted tax litigators

“Everything that’s happened [in my career] has been about being open to experiences. I say that to the young lawyers: just be open to experiences, and you will have a great career, but you’ll also have an interesting life. And sometimes we forget that – that we have to enjoy what we do, and being open to those experiences is key to that,” says Meghji.

The case that took him to the Privy Council was Methanex Trinidad (Titan) Unlimited (Appellant) v The Board of Inland Revenue (Respondent) (Trinidad and Tobago). It involved the Trinidadian subsidiary of a Canadian company, Methanex Corporation, the world’s largest methanol producer. The subsidiary received a significant tax assessment from the local government, an assessment that it went to court over and lost. The company appealed the decision and asked Meghji, who was not a member of the Trinidadian bar, to represent them on appeal. He took on the case, but the verdict went against them. He then sought and was granted leave to appeal to the Privy Council. The case was heard in April 2024, and a year later, Meghji got his judgment.

“The case was all about interpreting the CARICOM tax treaty, so it was about fundamental principles, about how you interpret an applied tax treaty and how principles of tax avoidance interact with tax treaties. While it related to the domestic law of Trinidad, the concepts were very much international tax concepts, and so that’s how it all came about,” explains Meghji.

Before appearing before the court, Meghji says he had to familiarize himself with its protocols, which include referring to the justices as my lords and my ladies and brushing up on the specific terminology of the court, which uses “bundles” instead of appeal books, for example. Meghji, who has appeared frequently before the Supreme Court of Canada, notes one significant difference between the Canadian court and the Privy Council: time. The court spent the entire day on the case instead of the two-hour hearing that Meghji says is typical of the Supreme Court of Canada.

“It was great. I must confess, it was fun, but it was a big deal doing this because it was a client who had made a pretty radical choice not to continue with their local Trinidad counsel or to hire a British barrister – that they picked a Canadian lawyer to go there when that hadn’t happened in decades. I always felt that this client put a lot of trust in us, so we’d better show up.”

One of the aspects that Meghji found rewarding about the process and the judgement was the amount of demonstrated respect the Privy Council had for Canadian courts. He says they “sang the praises” of the Supreme Court of Canada and cited several of its decisions while giving it “glowing reviews.” Meghji explains that he relied extensively on Supreme Court of Canada decisions in making his arguments, and seeing the Privy Council respond so well and so strongly to them “just felt so good. Our Supreme Court has the stature and the credibility that the Judicial Committee would rely on their decisions in support of the decision they made, that was very cool.”

Of course, Meghji is very familiar with Supreme Court of Canada decisions, having won a large number of landmark cases there, including Shell Canada Ltd. v. Canada (tax avoidance), Canada Trustco Mortgage Co. v. Canada (Canadian GAAR), Canada v. GlaxoSmithKline Inc. (transfer pricing) and Canada v. Loblaw Financial Holdings Inc. (tax provision interpretation).

But Meghji’s Supreme Court of Canada record isn’t perfect. He has lost before the court and says the losses always hit hard.

“Even after doing this for 40 years, it’s pretty damn painful. I suppose different lawyers view this differently, but I’ve always asked myself whether I overreact to these things. I think one of the reasons that it feels that way is, first of all, you’ve worked so hard on something. And most of the time, when the case goes up to the Supreme Court, you’re in the fight. The Supreme Court doesn’t take cases unless there’s something that needs to be debated...

“For me, a loss is far more painful than the pleasure of a victory. Mostly, I think that my reaction when we win is ‘Phew. I think we dodged a bullet.’ It’s not the joy of celebration; it’s more relief, but when we lose, the pain of it is far more than the pleasure of winning.”

Where Meghji does find pleasure is in acting as a mentor for young lawyers, helping them get started in tax litigation, and watching their careers blossom.

“I’m saying this with such pride and humility at the same time; it just gives me immense pleasure when I see these young lawyers excited about the job. They love advocacy. They’re intellectually stimulated.”

Even though he’s in his late 60s and playing the “back nine” of his career, Meghji says he’s got a full trial list, including several of what he refers to as significant appeals coming up. And there’s even the possibility that he may head down to the Caribbean again this summer to take on another major case.

His drive and dedication are still there, traits that his colleague of 40 years says define Meghji. Doug Richardson is currently a Cassels partner in the business law group and co-chair of the firm’s tax and trusts group, but he previously worked with Meghji at Bennett Jones. Richardson describes Meghji as his “best friend” and even attributes some of his success to Meghji’s advice and support. He says that Meghji has been so dedicated to building up a successful litigation practice – putting in incalculable amounts of time and effort – that he couldn’t fully capitalize on other professional opportunities.

But, he adds, it was a commitment that paid off, as Meghji’s reputation is well known in Canada and internationally throughout the business and legal communities.

“He’s got himself to the position where if you’re a VP of tax and you’ve got a company-breaking issue if you hire somebody else and you go out and lose that case, your directors will say, ‘Why didn’t you hire Al Meghji?’”

And that solid reputation extends even beyond his legal work. Richardson notes Meghji’s generous charitable contributions – both time and money. For instance, he draws attention to the work Meghji has done for the Aga Khan Foundation and for the yearly $15,000 entrance scholarship established by Meghji and his wife Diana Belevsky at Dalhousie’s Schulich School of Law for a student who represents the first generation of their family to attend university.

Richardson describes Meghji’s approach to the law as one of thorough preparedness. He says Meghji often counsels clients about what actions to take to get ahead of legal matters and better position themselves before presenting their cases in court. As for Meghji’s court strategy, Richardson describes it as adaptable and flexible as it is comprehensive.

“For the Privy Council, he told me he had seven openings mapped out. He could go one of seven different ways, depending on how he felt that day, what he thought of the court and what they were looking at,” says Richardson.

“But to his style, I’ve watched him, and as a tax lawyer, he’s a little bit pedantic because he starts at fundamental principles. He starts with his basic principle and gets [the judges] to buy into that. And then he puts another one out there, and they buy into that. And then, at the end, they say, ‘’This isn’t so bad.’”

Richardson says that part of Meghji’s trial preparation involves arguing his cases before retired judges, including retired Supreme Court Justice Marshall Rothstein and Federal Court of Appeal Chief Justice Marc Noël.

Meghji earned the respect of many people sitting on the bench of the Supreme Court, Richardson says, “I think the court trusts him" before adding that some of the justices even complimented him.

A good relationship with those on the bench isn’t anything new. Meghji clerked for Justice Arthur Stone of the Federal Court of Appeal, and Justice Stone nudged Meghji along the career path of being a tax litigator.

Meghji grew up in Alberta (and still considers himself an Albertan) after his family immigrated to Canada from Africa in 1975. Before studying law at Dalhousie, he earned a degree in chemistry and his designation as a chartered accountant. After graduating from law school and clerking for Justice Stone, Meghji went to Harvard to obtain his master’s of law. He was then hired by a firm in Calgary as a tax solicitor, but his wife was offered a clerkship at the Supreme Court of Canada, so the two of them moved to Ottawa with plans to stay for a year. Meghji began looking for work.

“Arthur Stone said to me, ‘You need to try litigation. This business about you being a solicitor doesn’t make a lot of sense to me,’ because he knew me. He said, ‘You should think about the Department of Justice, tax litigation section. Just try it and see how it goes.’ And I went to the Department of Justice tax litigation, and three months later I thought, ‘this is it.’ I was essentially a kid in a candy store. It was so good. I didn't leave for six years.”

Falling into something he loved, especially after two earlier careers that didn’t capture his heart, was something that Meghji says happened because he was open to trying something new.

“I always say, be open to possibilities. Be open-minded. Don’t plan your path so precisely that you’re always looking down the road, and you’re never conscious of what’s around you. … There will be people that you will meet, some of them will reach out to you and extend their hand. Take it, and then your time will come where you’ll get to extend the hand to somebody else.”