Date: 20060213
Docket: T-3-05
Citation: 2006 FC 182
OTTAWA, Ontario, February 13th, 2006
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KELEN
BETWEEN:
VAN PHAT HOANG
Plaintiff
and
MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE and
MINISTER OF SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Defendants
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
(With respect to Summary Judgment)
[1] This is a motion by the defendants for summary judgment seeking determination of the plaintiff's action as the only genuine issue for trial is a question of law.
[2] This question of law requires the interpretation of subsections 12(1) and 12(3)(a) of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, S.C. 2000, c. 17 (the "Act") which reads as follows:
| 12. (1) Every person or entity referred to in subsection (3) shall report to an officer, in accordance with the regulations, the importation or exportation of currency or monetary instruments of a value equal to or greater than the prescribed amount.
[ ...]
(3) Currency or monetary instruments shall be reported under subsection (1)
(a) in the case of currency or monetary instruments in the actual possession of a person arriving in or departing from Canada, or that form part of their baggage if they and their baggage are being carried on board the same conveyance, by that person or, in prescribed circumstances, by the person in charge of the conveyance;
|
12. (1) Les personnes ou entités visées au paragraphe (3) sont tenues de déclarer à l'agent, conformément aux règlements, l'importation ou l'exportation des espèces ou effets d'une valeur égale ou supérieure au montant réglementaire.
[ ...]
(3) Le déclarant est, selon le cas :
a) la personne ayant en sa possession effective ou parmi ses bagages les espèces ou effets se trouvant à bord du moyen de transport par lequel elle est arrivée au Canada ou a quitté le pays ou la personne qui, dans les circonstances réglementaires, est responsable du moyen de transport;
|
To be determined in this case is whether the obligation to report the importation of currency with a value equal to or greater than Cdn. $10,000 arises when an individual does not have the subjective intention to import this currency.
Facts
[3] On March 13, 2004, the plaintiff Van Phat Hoang was driving across Canada. He was lost and took a wrong turn towards the United States border at Pigeon River, Ontario. The plaintiff's vehicle turned around after crossing into United States territory, but before going through the U.S. border checkpoint.
[4] Upon arriving at the Canadian border checkpoint, the plaintiff was questioned by Canadian Customs Officers. When asked whether he was in possession of money or monetary instruments equal to or greater than Cdn. $10,000, the plaintiff responded in the negative. A subsequent search of the plaintiff's vehicle revealed Cdn. $70,000 in cash, which was packaged in plastic bags and hidden in the tailgate liner of the pick-up truck.
[5] Failing to report the import of money or monetary instruments equal to or greater than Cdn. $10,000 to Customs Officers is an offence under section 12 of the Act. Pursuant to section 18 of the Act, the cash was seized by the Customs Officers as forfeit.
[6] The plaintiff applied to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness for the return of the funds under section 25 of the Act. Section 25 reads:
|
Request for Minister's decision
25. A person from whom currency or monetary instruments were seized under section 18, or the lawful owner of the currency or monetary instruments, may within 90 days after the date of the seizure request a decision of the Minister as to whether subsection 12(1) was contravened, by giving notice in writing to the officer who seized the currency or monetary instruments or to an officer at the customs office closest to the place where the seizure took place.
|
Demande de revision
25. La personne entre les mains de qui ont été saisis des espèces ou effets en vertu de l'article 18 ou leur propriétaire légitime peut, dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours suivant la saisie, demander au ministre de décider s'il y a eu contravention au paragraphe 12(1) en donnant un avis écrit à l'agent qui les a saisis ou à un agent du bureau de douane le plus proche du lieu de la saisie.
|
The Minister's Decision under Appeal
[7] By decision dated October 5, 2004, the Minister informed the plaintiff that the $70,000 would not be returned to him and that the forfeiture was deemed to be justified by the Act "[i]n light of the amount of money found, the manner of its transportation and packaging, as well as the lack of documentary evidence establishing its legitimate/legal origin".
[8] The plaintiff appealed the Minister's decision under section 30 of the Act, which provides for an appeal of the Minister's decision under section 25 by way of an action in the Federal Court.
Relevant legislation
[9] The relevant statutes are:
1. the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, S.C. 2000, c.17; and
2. the Customs Act, R.S. 1985, c.1.
The relevant sections are set out in Appendix "A".
[10] Pursuant to subsection 2(1) of the Cross-border Currency and Monetary Instruments Reporting Regulations, SOR/2002-412 (the "Regulations"), the prescribed amount referred to in subsection 12(1) is Cdn. $10,000. See Appendix "A" for this section of the Regulations.
The Plaintiff's Argument
[11] The plaintiff states that he was not aware that he had left Canada, and was not told by Canada Customs officers that he had done so. He argues that he did not intend to cross the border and leave Canada, thus he neither exported nor imported the money in question.
[12] The plaintiff urges this Court to view section 12 within the context and purpose of the Act, which is to combat international money laundering. It is submitted that the aim of the Act is not to detain persons who cross the border accidentally without the intention of leaving Canada. An element of intention is said to be necessary for there to be exportation or importation of goods.
[13] The plaintiff relies upon the following definitions in Black's Law Dictionary, 7th ed. (St. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing Co.: 1999) which read:
import, n 1. A product brought into a country from a foreign country where it originated.
importation. The bringing of goods in a country from another country.
The plaintiff submits that he did not import the cash because the cash was not brought into Canada "from a foreign country where it originated". The cash never entered the U.S., and never came to Canada from the U.S.
The Defendants' Argument
[14] The defendants submit that an individual's intention to cross the border is not relevant. The obligation to report under section 12 arises whenever a person leaves or enters Canada with currency or monetary instruments in excess of Cdn. $10,000, regardless of their intention. This interpretation of section 12 is said to be in accord with the ordinary meanings of the words "exportation" and "importation" and with the context and the purpose of the Act.
[15] The defendants rely on the modern approach to statutory interpretation, as set out in Dreidger on the Construction of Statutes (2nd ed. 1983), and endorsed by the Supreme Court of Canada in Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd., [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27:
Today there is only one principle or approach, namely, the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament.
[16] The ordinary meanings of exportation and importation are as follows, according to Black's Law Dictionary: exportation is "the act of sending or carrying goods from one country to another", and importation is "the bringing of goods into a country from another country". The Supreme Court of Canada's construction of the word "import" (in the context of a drug case [1983] 2 S.C.R. 471">R. v. Bell, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 471) was that to import into Canada means to bring a good from anywhere outside Canada to anywhere inside Canada. This necessarily includes the act of crossing the border.
[17] When interpreting federal statutes, the defendants submit that the Court must bear in mind section 12 of the Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21, which says that every enactment is to be given large and liberal construction and interpretation as best ensures the attainment of its objectives.
[18] The purpose of the Act is to track suspicious financial transactions and the cross-border movement of large amounts of currency. It does not restrict the amount of money that may be brought into or taken out of Canada or render such a practice illegal. It simply creates a mandatory reporting obligation for the import or export of sums equal to or greater than the designated amount, which currently is Cdn. $10,000.
[19] If an individual imports or exports currency or monetary instruments in excess of this amount, there is no consequence if the act is reported and the individual is able to account for the funds. If an individual fails to make such a report, a Customs Officer may seize the money as forfeit pursuant to section 18 of the Act. The seized funds may be returned to their owner upon payment of a penalty, unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that the money is proceeds of crime, whereupon the funds will be held as forfeit by the Crown.
[20] In the submission of the defendants, this reporting requirement is mandatory, automatic, and not dependent upon an individual's intention. Including an intention requirement would result in ineffective detection of cross-border movements of money. Parliament does not intend such a consequence; it is unreasonable to interpret a statute in a way which defeats its purpose.
[21] Further guidance is said to be obtained from the interpretation of the reporting requirement under the Customs Act, R.S. 1985, c. 1, under which an importer must account for the quantity and value of goods and pay the associated duties and taxes. Failure to meet this obligation results in a penalty, no matter the source of the error or the intention of the importer. The lack of intent to mislead or the presence of an inadvertent error do not affect the validity of a seizure, see He v. Canada (2000), 182 F.T.R. 85 (T.D.). It is submitted that the reporting obligation under the Act is analogous, and the intention of the individual is irrelevant. Failing to report in accordance with the Act is said to be a contravention of the Act, regardless of whether the individual had the intention to export or import the currency or monetary instrument.
The Test for Granting Summary Judgment
[22] The issue of summary judgment is governed by Rules 213 to 219 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106. Of particular import in this case is Rule 216, which provides in part:
| 216. (1) Where on a motion for summary judgment the Court is satisfied that there is no genuine issue for trial with respect to a claim or defence, the Court shall grant summary judgment accordingly.
(2) Where on a motion for summary judgment the Court is satisfied that the only genuine issue is
[. . .]
(b) a question of law, the Court may determine the question and grant summary judgment accordingly.
(3) Where on a motion for summary judgment the Court decides that there is a genuine issue with respect to a claim or defence, the Court may nevertheless grant summary judgment in favour of any party, either on an issue or generally, if the Court is able on the whole of the evidence to find the facts necessary to decide the questions of fact and law.
[. . .]
|
216. (1) Lorsque, par suite d'une requête en jugement sommaire, la Cour est convaincue qu'il n'existe pas de véritable question litigieuse quant à une déclaration ou à une défense, elle rend un jugement sommaire en conséquence.
Somme d'argent ou point de droit
(2) Lorsque, par suite d'une requête en jugement sommaire, la Cour est convaincue que la seule véritable question litigieuse est :
[. . .]
b) un point de droit, elle peut statuer sur celui-ci et rendre un jugement sommaire en conséquence.
(3) Lorsque, par suite d'une requête en jugement sommaire, la Cour conclut qu'il existe une véritable question litigieuse à l'égard d'une déclaration ou d'une défense, elle peut néanmoins rendre un jugement sommaire en faveur d'une partie, soit sur une question particulière, soit de façon générale, si elle parvient à partir de l'ensemble de la preuve à dégager les faits nécessaires pour trancher les questions de fait et de droit.
[. . .]
|
[23] This Court may grant summary judgment if the only genuine issue for trial is a question of law which is to be decided upon agreed upon evidence. The Federal Court of Appeal has limited the circumstances in which a judge may grant summary judgment, for fear of rendering decisions which are unfair on the evidence, see MacNeil Estate v. Canada(Department of Indian and Northern Affairs), 2004 FCA 50. Because this case has no contested facts and turns solely on a question of law, the caution in MacNeil does not apply.
Analysis
[24] The facts of this case are not in dispute. The sole issue is a question of law. The plaintiff agrees. Pursuant to sub-rule 216(1) of the Federal Courts Rules, I have determined that the only genuine issue for trial is a question of law, i.e. the interpretation of section 12 of the Act.
[25] The word "importation" is defined neither in the Act, nor in the Regulations. This means that Parliament intended for the ordinary meaning of this word to apply.
[26] The meaning of the phrase "the importation ... of currency ... " in subsection 12(1) of the Act is a question of law to be determined by the Court with the aid of dictionaries. See Pfizer Co. v. Canada(Deputy Minister of National Revenue, Customs and Excise - M.N.R.), [1973] F.C. 3 (C.A.) per Jackett C.J. at paragraph 19:
¶ 19 In legal theory, as I understand the law, the general rule is that a word in a document such as a statute or order in council having the effect of law is to be given its ordinary or popular meaning according to the context [See Note 1 below] and that meaning is a question of law to be determined by the Court with the aid of dictionaries and other legitimate aids of construction. ...
[27] The plaintiff submits that the word "importation" means the intended bringing into Canada of the cash from another country. With respect, the Court does not agree. In determining the grammatical and ordinary sense of the word "importation" used by Canadians, the Court has referred to the definition provided in the Canadian Oxford Dictionary, 2nd Ed., (Toronto Ontario: Oxford University Press, 2004). The Canadian Oxford Dictionary defines the verb "import" as:
to bring in (especially foreign goods or services) to a country.
(The Canadian Oxford Dictionary does not provide a definition for "importation".)
Black's Law Dictionary defines "importation" as:
the bringing of goods into a country from another country.
The definitions speak of the concept of bringing goods into a country. This is a physical act. I do not agree with the plaintiff that these meanings require an intention on behalf of the actor.
[28] The reporting requirement under section 12 of the Act is analogous to the duty to report imported goods under section 12 of the Customs Act. The jurisprudence under section 12 of the Customs Act has held that this Act is contravened when an incorrect declaration is made on behalf of the importer even if that error was made with a lack of intent to mislead customs. An inadvertent error in reporting imported goods does not affect the validity of a seizure of those goods. See He v. Canada, [2000] F.C.J. No. 93 per Pinard J. at paragraph 8, Marstar Canada Inc. v. Canada, [ 1998] F.C.J. No. 1296 per Denault J. at paragraph 4 and The Queen v. Letarte, [1981] 2 F.C. 76 (FCA) at page 76.
[29] A purposive analysis further supports the defendants' position in this matter. The plaintiff states that the purpose of the Act is to combat international money laundering. This is not the only purpose. As set out in section 3, the Act requires the reporting of the importation of currency and monetary instruments. To achieve this purpose, the tracking system is obligatory.
[30] I conclude that section 12 of the Act is not dependent upon an individual's intention to import. The plaintiff has no other defence for his failure to report the currency. Accordingly, I must allow the motion for summary judgment.
Obiter
[31] The plaintiff has not challenged in this appeal whether the Minister had reasonable grounds to suspect that the seized currency are proceeds of crime. This is also part of the Minister's decision. In Dokaj v. Canada(Minister of National Revenue - MNR), [2005] F.C.J. No. 1783 this Court held that that part of the decision under this Act must be challenged by way of judicial review under section 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7, and cannot be challenged by way of this action under section 30 of the Act. The Court held that this dichotomy in the appeal procedure is "both awkward and inconvenient", and "unfair", see paragraph 39 of Dokaj, supra.
[32] I wish to state in obiter that the appeal to the Federal Court under subsection 30(1) of the Act is not so clear that I would conclude that Parliament intended two appeals to the Federal Court with respect to the same decision, or that Parliament would have provided a party with the right to appeal the decision by way of an action in the Federal Court, yet limited that appeal to only one part of the decision.
[33] For example, in the case at bar, the decision of the Minister was under section 27 of the Act, namely that there had been a contravention of section 12, and under section 29, namely that the seized currency in the amount of $70,000 is held as forfeit. The appeal right under section 30 is written in reasonably broad language. It provides that the person who requested a decision of the Minister under section 25 may appeal "the decision" by way of an action to the Federal Court. While the request for the decision is as to whether subsection 12(1) of the Act was contravened, the decision which may be appealed is made under sections 27, 28 and 29 of the Act, with the right of an appeal of that decision under section 30. Applying a modern approach to statutory construction, my interpretation meets the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act and the intention of Parliament. A narrow interpretation would be, as the Court said in Dokai, supra, "awkward", "inconvenient" and "unfair". I cannot conclude that Parliament would have intended such a result, and I do not think the language of section 30 is so clear as to dictate such a result.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS THAT:
This motion by the defendants for summary judgment is allowed so that this action is dismissed with costs.
"Michael A. Kelen"
APPENDIX "A"
1. Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, S.C. 2000, c. 17
|
|
|
| Currency and monetary instruments
12. (1) Every person or entity referred to in subsection (3) shall report to an officer, in accordance with the regulations, the importation or exportation of currency or monetary instruments of a value equal to or greater than the prescribed amount.
Limitation
(2) A person or entity is not required to make a report under subsection (1) in respect of an activity if the prescribed conditions are met in respect of the person, entity or activity, and if the person or entity satisfies an officer that those conditions have been met.
Who must report
(3) Currency or monetary instruments shall be reported under subsection (1)
(a) in the case of currency or monetary instruments in the actual possession of a person arriving in or departing from Canada, or that form part of their baggage if they and their baggage are being carried on board the same conveyance, by that person or, in prescribed circumstances, by the person in charge of the conveyance;
(b) in the case of currency or monetary instruments imported into Canada by courier or as mail, by the exporter of the currency or monetary instruments or, on receiving notice under subsection 14(2), by the importer;
(c) in the case of currency or monetary instruments exported from Canada by courier or as mail, by the exporter of the currency or monetary instruments;
(d) in the case of currency or monetary instruments, other than those referred to in paragraph (a) or imported or exported as mail, that are on board a conveyance arriving in or departing from Canada, by the person in charge of the conveyance; and
(e) in any other case, by the person on whose behalf the currency or monetary instruments are imported or exported.
Duty to answer and comply with the request of an officer
(4) If a report is made in respect of currency or monetary instruments, the person arriving in or departing from Canada with the currency or monetary instruments shall
(a) answer truthfully any questions that the officer asks with respect to the information required to be contained in the report; and
(b) on request of an officer, present the currency or monetary instruments that they are carrying or transporting, unload any conveyance or part of a conveyance or baggage and open or unpack any package or container that the officer wishes to examine.
Sending reports to Centre
(5) Officers shall send the reports they receive under subsection (1) to the Centre.
|
Déclaration
12. (1) Les personnes ou entités visées au paragraphe (3) sont tenues de déclarer à l'agent, conformément aux règlements, l'importation ou l'exportation des espèces ou effets d'une valeur égale ou supérieure au montant réglementaire.
Exception
(2) Une personne ou une entité n'est pas tenue de faire une déclaration en vertu du paragraphe (1) à l'égard d'une importation ou d'une exportation si les conditions réglementaires sont réunies à l'égard de la personne, de l'entité, de l'importation ou de l'exportation et si la personne ou l'entité convainc un agent de ce fait.
Déclarant
(3) Le déclarant est, selon le cas :
a) la personne ayant en sa possession effective ou parmi ses bagages les espèces ou effets se trouvant à bord du moyen de transport par lequel elle est arrivée au Canada ou a quitté le pays ou la personne qui, dans les circonstances réglementaires, est responsable du moyen de transport;
b) s'agissant d'espèces ou d'effets importés par messager ou par courrier, l'exportateur étranger ou, sur notification aux termes du paragraphe 14(2), l'importateur;
c) l'exportateur des espèces ou effets exportés par messager ou par courrier;
d) le responsable du moyen de transport arrivé au Canada ou qui a quitté le pays et à bord duquel se trouvent des espèces ou effets autres que ceux visés à l'alinéa a) ou importés ou exportés par courrier;
e) dans les autres cas, la personne pour le compte de laquelle les espèces ou effets sont importés ou exportés.
Obligation du déclarant
(4) Une fois la déclaration faite, la personne qui entre au Canada ou quitte le pays avec les espèces ou effets doit :
a) répondre véridiquement aux questions que lui pose l'agent à l'égard des renseignements à déclarer en application du paragraphe (1);
b) à la demande de l'agent, lui présenter les espèces ou effets qu'elle transporte, décharger les moyens de transport et en ouvrir les parties et ouvrir ou défaire les colis et autres contenants que l'agent veut examiner.
Transmission au Centre
(5) L'agent fait parvenir au Centre les déclarations recueillies en application du paragraphe (1).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Seizure and forfeiture
18. (1) If an officer believes on reasonable grounds that subsection 12(1) has been contravened, the officer may seize as forfeit the currency or monetary instruments.
Return of seized currency or monetary instruments
(2) The officer shall, on payment of a penalty in the prescribed amount, return the seized currency or monetary instruments to the individual from whom they were seized or to the lawful owner unless the officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that the currency or monetary instruments are proceeds of crime within the meaning of subsection 462.3(1) of the Criminal Code or funds for use in the financing of terrorist activities.
Notice of seizure
(3) An officer who seizes currency or monetary instruments under subsection (1) shall
(a) if they were not imported or exported as mail, give the person from whom they were seized written notice of the seizure and of the right to review and appeal set out in sections 25 and 30;
(b) if they were imported or exported as mail and the address of the exporter is known, give the exporter written notice of the seizure and of the right to review and appeal set out in sections 25 and 30; and
(c) take the measures that are reasonable in the circumstances to give notice of the seizure to any person whom the officer believes on reasonable grounds is entitled to make an application under section 32 in respect of the currency or monetary instruments.
Service of notice
(4) The service of a notice under paragraph (3)(b) is sufficient if it is sent by registered mail addressed to the exporter.
|
Saisie et confiscation
18. (1) S'il a des motifs raisonnables de croire qu'il y a eu contravention au paragraphe 12(1), l'agent peut saisir à titre de confiscation les espèces ou effets.
Mainlevée
(2) Sur réception du paiement de la pénalité réglementaire, l'agent restitue au saisi ou au propriétaire légitime les espèces ou effets saisis sauf s'il soupçonne, pour des motifs raisonnables, qu'il s'agit de produits de la criminalité au sens du paragraphe 462.3(1) du Code criminel ou de fonds destinés au financement des activités terroristes.
Avis de la saisie
(3) L'agent qui procède à la saisie-confiscation prévue au paragraphe (1) :
a) donne au saisi, dans le cas où les espèces ou effets sont importés ou exportés autrement que par courrier, un avis écrit de la saisie et du droit de révision et d'appel établi aux articles 25 et 30;
b) donne à l'exportateur, dans le cas où les espèces ou effets sont importés ou exportés par courrier et son adresse est connue, un avis écrit de la saisie et du droit de révision et d'appel établi aux articles 25 et 30;
c) prend les mesures convenables, eu égard aux circonstances, pour aviser de la saisie toute personne dont il croit, pour des motifs raisonnables, qu'elle est recevable à présenter, à l'égard des espèces ou effets saisis, la requête visée à l'article 32.
Signification de l'avis
(4) Il suffit, pour que l'avis visé à l'alinéa (3)b) soit considéré comme signifié, qu'il soit envoyé en recommandé à l'exportateur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Request for Minister's decision
25. A person from whom currency or monetary instruments were seized under section 18, or the lawful owner of the currency or monetary instruments, may within 90 days after the date of the seizure request a decision of the Minister as to whether subsection 12(1) was contravened, by giving notice in writing to the officer who seized the currency or monetary instruments or to an officer at the customs office closest to the place where the seizure took place.
|
Demande de révision
25. La personne entre les mains de qui ont été saisis des espèces ou effets en vertu de l'article 18 ou leur propriétaire légitime peut, dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours suivant la saisie, demander au ministre de décider s'il y a eu contravention au paragraphe 12(1) en donnant un avis écrit à l'agent qui les a saisis ou à un agent du bureau de douane le plus proche du lieu de la saisie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Notice of Commissioner
26. (1) If a decision of the Minister is requested under section 25, the Commissioner shall without delay serve on the person who requested it written notice of the circumstances of the seizure in respect of which the decision is requested.
Evidence
(2) The person on whom a notice is served under subsection (1) may, within 30 days after the notice is served, furnish any evidence in the matter that they desire to furnish.
|
Signification du commissaire
26. (1) Le commissaire signifie sans délai par écrit à la personne qui a présenté la demande visée à l'article 25 un avis exposant les circonstances de la saisie à l'origine de la demande.
Moyens de preuve
(2) Le demandeur dispose de trente jours à compter de la signification de l'avis pour produire tous moyens de preuve à l'appui de ses prétentions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Decision of the Minister
27. (1) Within 90 days after the expiry of the period referred to in subsection 26(2), the Minister shall decide whether subsection 12(1) was contravened.
Deferral of decision
(2) If charges are laid with respect to a money laundering offence or a terrorist activity financing offence in respect of the currency or monetary instruments seized, the Minister may defer making a decision but shall make it in any case no later than 30 days after the conclusion of all court proceedings in respect of those charges.
Notice of decision
(3) The Minister shall, without delay after making a decision, serve on the person who requested it a written notice of the decision together with the reasons for it.
|
Décision du ministre
27. (1) Dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours qui suivent l'expiration du délai mentionné au paragraphe 26(2), le ministre décide s'il y a eu contravention au paragraphe 12(1).
Report de la décision
(2) Dans le cas où des poursuites pour infraction de recyclage des produits de la criminalité ou pour infraction de financement des activités terroristes ont été intentées relativement aux espèces ou effets saisis, le ministre peut reporter la décision, mais celle-ci doit être prise dans les trente jours suivant l'issue des poursuites.
Avis de la décision
(3) Le ministre signifie sans délai par écrit à la personne qui a fait la demande un avis de la décision, motifs à l'appui.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| If there is no contravention
28. If the Minister decides that subsection 12(1) was not contravened, the Minister of Public Works and Government Services shall, on being informed of the Minister's decision, return the penalty that was paid, or the currency or monetary instruments or an amount of money equal to their value at the time of the seizure, as the case may be.
|
Cas sans contravention
28. Si le ministre décide qu'il n'y a pas eu de contravention au paragraphe 12(1), le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux, dès qu'il est informé de la décision du ministre, restitue la valeur de la pénalité réglementaire, les espèces ou effets ou la valeur de ceux-ci au moment de la saisie, selon le cas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| If there is a contravention
29. (1) If the Minister decides that subsection 12(1) was contravened, the Minister shall, subject to the terms and conditions that the Minister may determine,
(a) decide that the currency or monetary instruments or, subject to subsection (2), an amount of money equal to their value on the day the Minister of Public Works and Government Services is informed of the decision, be returned, on payment of a penalty in the prescribed amount or without penalty;
(b) decide that any penalty or portion of any penalty that was paid under subsection 18(2) be remitted; or
(c) subject to any order made under section 33 or 34, confirm that the currency or monetary instruments are forfeited to Her Majesty in right of Canada.
The Minister of Public Works and Government Services shall give effect to a decision of the Minister under paragraph (a) or (b) on being informed of it.
Limit on amount paid
(2) The total amount paid under paragraph (1)(a) shall, if the currency or monetary instruments were sold or otherwise disposed of under the Seized Property Management Act, not exceed the proceeds of the sale or disposition, if any, less any costs incurred by Her Majesty in respect of the currency or monetary instruments.
|
Cas de contravention
29. (1) S'il décide qu'il y a eu contravention au paragraphe 12(1), le ministre, aux conditions qu'il fixe :
a) soit décide de restituer les espèces ou effets ou, sous réserve du paragraphe (2), la valeur de ceux-ci à la date où le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux est informé de la décision, sur réception de la pénalité réglementaire ou sans pénalité;
b) soit décide de restituer tout ou partie de la pénalité versée en application du paragraphe 18(2);
c) soit confirme la confiscation des espèces ou effets au profit de Sa Majesté du chef du Canada, sous réserve de toute ordonnance rendue en application des articles 33 ou 34.
Le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux, dès qu'il en est informé, prend les mesures nécessaires à l'application des alinéas a) ou b).
Limitation du montant versé
(2) En cas de vente ou autre forme d'aliénation des espèces ou effets en vertu de la Loi sur l'administration des biens saisis, le montant de la somme versée en vertu de l'alinéa (1)a) ne peut être supérieur au produit éventuel de la vente ou de l'aliénation, duquel sont soustraits les frais afférents exposés par Sa Majesté; à défaut de produit de l'aliénation, aucun paiement n'est effectué.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Appeal to Federal Court
30. (1) A person who requests a decision of the Minister under section 25 may, within 90 days after being notified of the decision, appeal the decision by way of an action in the Federal Court in which the person is the plaintiff and the Minister is the defendant.
Ordinary action
(2) The Federal Courts Act and the rules made under that Act that apply to ordinary actions apply to actions instituted under subsection (1) except as varied by special rules made in respect of such actions.
Delivery after final order
(3) The Minister of Public Works and Government Services shall give effect to the decision of the Court on being informed of it.
Limit on amount paid
(4) If the currency or monetary instruments were sold or otherwise disposed of under the Seized Property Management Act, the total amount that can be paid under subsection (3) shall not exceed the proceeds of the sale or disposition, if any, less any costs incurred by Her Majesty in respect of the currency or monetary instruments.
|
Cour fédérale
30. (1) La personne qui a présenté une demande en vertu de l'article 25 peut, dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours suivant la communication de la décision, en appeler par voie d'action devant la Cour fédérale à titre de demandeur, le ministre étant le défendeur.
Action ordinaire
(2) La Loi sur les Cours fédérales et les règles prises aux termes de cette loi applicables aux actions ordinaires s'appliquent aux actions intentées en vertu du paragraphe (1), avec les adaptations nécessaires occasionnées par les règles propres à ces actions.
Restitution au requérant
(3) Le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux, dès qu'il en a été informé, prend les mesures nécessaires pour donner effet à la décision de la Cour.
Limitation du montant versé
(4) En cas de vente ou autre forme d'aliénation des espèces ou effets en vertu de la Loi sur l'administration des biens saisis, le montant de la somme qui peut être versée en vertu du paragraphe (3) ne peut être supérieur au produit éventuel de la vente ou de l'aliénation, duquel sont soustraits les frais afférents exposés par Sa Majesté; à défaut de produit de l'aliénation, aucun paiement n'est effectué.
|
2. Customs Act, R.S., 1985, c. 1 (2nd Supp.).
|
|
|
| Report
12. (1) Subject to this section, all goods that are imported shall, except in such circumstances and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, be reported at the nearest customs office designated for that purpose that is open for business.
|
Déclaration
12. (1) Sous réserve des autres dispositions du présent article, ainsi que des circonstances et des conditions prévues par règlement, toutes les marchandises importées doivent être déclarées au bureau de douane le plus proche, doté des attributions prévues à cet effet, qui soit ouvert.
|
3. Cross-border Currency and Monetary Instruments Reporting Regulations, SOR/2002-412
|
|
|
| 2. (1) For the purposes of reporting the importation or exportation of currency or monetary instruments of a certain value under subsection 12(1) of the Act, the prescribed amount is $10,000.
(2) The prescribed amount is in Canadian dollars or its equivalent in a foreign currency, based on
(a) the official conversion rate of the Bank of Canada as published in the Bank of Canada's Daily Memorandum of Exchange Rates that is in effect at the time of importation or exportation; or
(b) if no official conversion rate is set out in that publication for that currency, the conversion rate that the person or entity would use for that currency in the normal course of business at the time of the importation or exportation.
|
2. (1) Pour l'application du paragraphe 12(1) de la Loi, les espèces ou effets dont l'importation ou l'exportation doit être déclarée doivent avoir une valeur égale ou supérieure à 10 000 $.
(2) La valeur de 10 000 $ est exprimée en dollars canadiens ou en son équivalent en devises selon:
a) le taux de conversion officiel de la Banque du Canada publié dans son Bulletin quotidien des taux de change en vigueur à la date de l'importation ou de l'exportation;
b) dans le cas où la devise ne figure pas dans ce bulletin, le taux de conversion que le déclarant utiliserait dans le cours normal de ses activités à cette date.
|
Email this Content