Agri Pack v. Canada (Border Services Agency), 2007 FCA 116

Date: 20070321

Docket: A-273-06

Citation: 2007 FCA 116

CORAM:       DÉCARY J.A.

                        SEXTON J.A.

                        EVANS J.A.

BETWEEN:

AGRI PACK

Appellant

and

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE CANADA CUSTOMS

AND REVENUE AGENCY

(NOW THE PRESIDENT OF THE CANADA BORDER SERVICES AGENCY)

Respondent

Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on March 21, 2007.

Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on March 21, 2007.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                                    EVANS J.A.

Date: 20070321

Docket: A-273-06

Citation: 2007 FCA 116

CORAM:       DÉCARY J.A.

                        SEXTON J.A.

                        EVANS J.A.

BETWEEN:

AGRI PACK

Appellant

and

THE COMMISSIONER OF THE CANADA CUSTOMS

AND REVENUE AGENCY

(NOW THE PRESIDENT OF THE CANADA BORDER SERVICES AGENCY)

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on March 21, 2007)

EVANS J.A.

[1]               This matter was remitted to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal by this Court to determine whether Chapter Note 2(a) excludes the application of Tariff Item 6305.33 or why the Note does not apply. See Canada (Commissioner of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency) v. Agri Pack, 2005 FCA 414 at para. 51.

[2]               In a decision dated May 15, 2006, the Tribunal summarized its reasoning as follows:

[16] … Note 2 (a) to Chapter 63 only applies if goods fall in heading No. 56.08, the very issue that was before the Tribunal. Having found, under Rule 1 of the General Rules, that the imported goods did not fall in heading No. 56.08, it was the Tribunal’s view that Note 2(a) had no application to the instant case and, for that reason, the Tribunal did not deem it necessary to refer to it in its reasons.

[3]               We are not persuaded that this explanation is unreasonable. It is irrelevant that there may be another plausible explanation of the relevant provisions.

[4]               For these reasons, the appeal will be dismissed with costs.

“John M. Evans”

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          A-273-06       

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          AGRI  PACK v. THE COMMISSIONER OF THE

CANADA CUSTOMS AND REVENUE AGENCY

(NOW THE PRESIDENT OF THE CANADA

BORDER  SERVICES AGENCY)

PLACE OF HEARING:                    TORONTO, ONTARIO

DATE OF HEARING:                      MARCH 21, 2007

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF

THE COURT BY:                              (DÉCARY, SEXTON & EVANS JJ.A.)         

DELIVERED FROM THE

BENCH BY:                                       EVANS J.A.

APPEARANCES:              

Dennis A. Wyslobicky                          FOR THE APPELLANT

Alexander Gay                                     FOR THE RESPONDENT   

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:  

Dennis A. Wyslobicky

Oakville, Ontario                                  FOR THE APPELLANT

 John H. Sims, Q.C.

 Deputy Attorney General of Canada    FOR THE RESPONDENT