Caithkin – Federal Court of Appeal affirms a decision which accepted the GST/HST concept of a “re-supply” of a service.

Graham J found that a company which placed children in foster homes for children’s aid societies and assisted the foster parents was making a "re-supply" to the societies of foster care services which it had "acquired" from the foster parents, but that this resupply was not exempt because the company did not satisfy the requirement that its service be provided "in an establishment operated by the supplier for the purpose of providing such service." On appeal, only the latter point was in issue, and Rennie JA found that, in context, "establishment" referred to a place of residence or home for the children (where the foster care services were provided) and did not encompass the business organization of the company.

Neal Armstrong. Summaries of Caithkin Inc. v. The Queen, 2014 TCC 80, aff’d 2015 FCA 118, under ETA, Sched V, Pt. IV, s. 2 and Statutory Interpretation - Redundancy.