MacLeod,
J.:—This
application
is
to
settle
competing
claims
to
funds
which
have
been
paid
into
court
by
Saskatchewan
Government
Insurance
(S.G.I.)
and
to
declare
certain
rights
as
between
the
parties.
Regina
Custom
Classic
Body
Works
Ltd.
(Custom
Classic)
operated
a
body
shop
in
Regina,
Saskatchewan,
to
repair
vehicles
of
persons,
including
persons
who
were
insured
for
such
repairs
by
S.G.I.
In
the
course
of
its
business
S.G.I.
received
authorization
to
pay
repair
accounts
for
such
insured
directly
to
Custom
Classic.
Custom
Classic
went
of
business
while
certain
of
such
insurance
moneys
remained
unpaid.
S.G.I.
received
demands
as
follows:
(1)
May
10,
1990,
a
requirement
to
pay
from
Revenue
Canada,
Taxation
(represented
herein
by
Her
Majesty
the
Queen
in
Right
of
Canada)
pursuant
to
subsection
224(1.2)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act,
R.S.C.
1952,
c.
148
(am.
S.C.
1970-71-72,
c.
63)
(the
"Act")
for
payroll
source
deductions.
(2)
June
20,
1990,
a
demand
from
Labour
Standards
Branch
pursuant
to
sections
54
and
55
of
The
Labour
Standards
Act,
R.S.S.
1978,
c.
L-1
as
amended
S.S.
1976-77,
c.
36,
S.S.
1979-80,
c.
92.
(3)
June
29,
1990,
a
demand
from
Saskatchewan
Workers'
Compensation
Board
pursuant
to
section
133
of
The
Workers’
Compensation
Act,
1979,
S.S.
1979,
c.
W-17.1.
The
first
question
to
be
answered
is
whether
the
conditions
set
forth
in
subsection
224(1.2)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
which
entitle
the
Minister
to
give
the
requirement
to
pay
have
been
met.
S.G.I.
is
an
insurer
which
makes
payments,
inter
alia,
under
Part
III
and
Part
IV
of
The
Automobile
Accident
Insurance
Act,
R.S.S.
1978,
c.
A-35.
Simply
stated,
for
purposes
of
the
case
before
me,
under
Part
III
the
insured
is
a
person
to
whom
money
is
payable
with
respect
to
damage
to
his
own
vehicle,
and
under
Part
IV
the
insured
is
a
person
on
whose
behalf
money
is
payable
for
damage
to
the
property
of
others.
Under
Part
III,
therefore,
S.G.I.
will
pay
the
proved
claim
(less
the
deductible)
which
the
insured
is
entitled
to
receive
under
the
insurance
on
his
own
vehicle.
Under
Part
IV,
if
another
person
is
responsible
for
the
accident
from
which
the
damage
arose,
and
if
S.G.I.
insures
that
party,
S.G.I.
will
pay
the
deductible
on
behalf
of
that
responsible
person.
There
were
26
files
outstanding
with
respect
to
Custom
Classic
when
it
ceased
business.
Of
these,
18
were
Part
III
files
and
8
were
Part
IV
files.
S.G.I.
submitted
copies
of
a
set
of
documents
which
may
be
typical
of
all
those
documents.
An
insured
whose
vehicle
was
damaged
made
a
claim,
including
these
words:
The
Actual
Loss
and
Damage
to
the
above
described
vehicle
at
the
time
of
the
loss
was:
$1,336.84
The
total
amount
claimed
under
the
terms
of
this
insurance
is:
$836.84
In
consideration
of
the
above
payment,
the
Insured
agrees
as
follows:
(a)
to
release
the
Insurer
from
all
claims
for
damage
to
the
insured
vehicle
occurring
prior
to
the
date
of
loss
stated
in
the
Proof
of
Loss;
(b)
to
the
extent
of
such
payment,
to
subrogate
the
Insurer
to
and
assign
to
it
all
rights
of
recovery
against
all
persons
who
have
caused
or
contributed
to
the
aforementioned
damage
to
the
said
vehicle,
and
upon
demand
to
execute
all
documents
required,
and
to
co-operate
with
the
Insurer
in
prosecuting
all
actions
to
effect
such
recovery.
(c)
That
the
said
amount
may,
at
the
option
of
the
Insurer,
be
paid
as
follows;
|
To
"Custom
Classic”
|
$836.84
|
|
To
|
$
|
|
To
|
$
|
|
Total
|
$836.84
|
and
such
payments
shall
be
considered
full
settlement
and
satisfaction
for
all
losses
and
damage
from
the
loss
specified
in
the
Proof
of
Loss.
That
insured
also
received
the
$500
deductible
from
the
person
at
fault
and
signed
a
release
which
contained
these
words
(substituting
for
the
actual
names):
PROPERTY
DAMAGE
RELEASE
and
“John
Doe”
each
for
himself,
his
heirs,
executors,
administrators,
successors
and
assigns
in
consideration
of
the
payment
of
$500
does
hereby
remise,
release
and
forever
discharge
"JoAnna
Rowe
as
owner
and
operator"
their
and
each
of
their
heirs,
executors,
administrators
and
assigns
from
and
against
all
claims,
demands,
actions
and
causes
of
action
for
damages
whensoever
and
howsoever
arising
On
account
of
damage
to
property
(including
loss
of
use
thereof)
arising
out
of
an
accident
which
occurred
on
or
about
the
"24"
day
of
“Feb.”
1990
at
or
near
"Regina",
in
the
Province
of
"Sask.".
The
above
sum
stated
as
a
consideration
of
this
Release
is
to
be
paid
as
follows:
Following
the
completion
of
the
work
the
insured
vehicle
owner
and
Custom
Classic
each
signed
a
certificate
of
repairs,
in
the
following
form:
CERTIFICATION
OF
REPAIRS
I,
“John
Doe",
the
registered
owner
(or
agent)
of
the
vehicle
described
above,
state
that
said
vehicle
has
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge
and
belief
been
satisfactorily
repaired.
I
hereby
authorize
SGI
to
pay
on
my
behalf
to
the
repairer
indicated
below
the
amount
in
the
appraisal
less
any
applicable
deductible.
Date:
“April
1990"
Insured's
Signature:
"John
Doe"
I,
"M.L.
Hayward
,
of
"Regina"
on
behalf
of
Custom
Classic
Body
Works
Ltd.
hereby
certify
that
all
parts
have
been
supplied
and
all
services
rendered
as
set
forth
in
this
appraisal.
Signature:
"M.L.
Hayward”
Repairer
Number:
“16279”
These
documents
are
each
for
a
different
purpose
but
have
these
common
features:
(a)
The
insured
whose
vehicle
was
damaged
claimed
$836.84
under
his
insurance
and
authorized
payment.
"at
the
option
of
the
Insurer,”
to
Custom
Classic;
and
(b)
That
same
insured
person
claimed
the
$500
deductible
from
the
party
responsible
for
the
damage
and
directed
that
“the
above
sum
stated
as
consideration
of
this
release
is
to
be
paid
as
follows
—
To
Custom
Classic
$500";
and
(c)
In
the
certificate
of
repairs
the
insured
whose
vehicle
was
damaged
and
who
was
responsible
for
payment
to
Custom
Classic
stated
that
the
repairs
had
been
made
and
authorized
S.G.I.
to
pay
Custom
Classic
the
amount
shown
in
the
appraisal
less
any
applicable
deductible,
(the
last
mentioned
amount
being
covered,
of
course,
by
the
Part
IV
payments).
The
insured
directed
S.G.I.
at
its
option,
to
pay
the
moneys
to
Custom
Classic.
S.G.I.
argues,
however,
that
this
is
a
convenience
which
does
not
mean
that
S.G.I.
is
liable
to
pay
Custom
Classic.
S.G.I.
is
liable
to
the
insured,
as
his
insurer,
but
the
insured
is
liable
to
Custom
Classic
for
repair
of
the
vehicle.
S.G.I.
is
likely
to
pay
Custom
Classic
on
behalf
of
the
insured
but
that
does
not
mean
it
is
liable
to
pay
Custom
Classic.
S.G.I.
satisfies
its
liability
to
the
insured
by
paying
Custom
Classic
in
accordance
with
the
directions
given
to
S.G.I.
by
each
insured.
These
directions
do
not
amount
to
an
assignment
entitling
Custom
Classic
to
maintain
an
action
against
S.G.I.
for
non-payment.
Failure
to
pay
would
entitle
Custom
Classic
to
maintain
an
action
against
the
insured
who
had
engaged
Custom
Classic
to
make
the
repairs.
The
words
in
subsection
224(1.2)
which
founds
the
minister’s
entitlement
to
deliver
a
requirement
to
pay,
in
simplified
form,
are:
“Where
a
person
is
.
.
.
liable
to
make
payment.
.
.
to
the
tax
debtor
”
In
the
relationship
which
exists
between
S.G.I.
(the
payor)
and
Custom
Classic
(the
tax
debtor)/'
liable
to
make
payment"
means
compellable
to
make
payment.
I
adopt
the
words
of
Lord
Denning
in
Littlewood
v.
Whimpey
and
Co.
[1953]
2
All
E.R.
915
at
921
also
[1953]
2
Q.B.
501
at
515,
as
follows:
In
my
opinion,
the
ordinary
meaning
of
the
word
“
liable”
in
a
legal
context
is
to
denote
the
fact
that
a
person
is
responsible
at
law.
[Emphasis
added.]
Being
likely
to
pay
the
insurance
moneys
to
Custom
Classic
in
accordance
with
its
insurance
arrangements
with
the
insured
is
not
enough,
the
entitlement
to
issue
the
demand
under
subsection
244(1.2)
depends
on
the
payor
being
liable
to
the
tax
debtor.
It
is
true
that
S.G.I.
was
likely
to
pay
Custom
Classic
but
it
was
not
liable
to
pay
Custom
Classic.
Its
liability
is
to
its
insured.
It
is
also
true
that
S.G.I.
might
make
itself
liable
to
the
repairer
where
S.G.I.
engages
the
repairer
or
undertakes
with
the
repairer
to
make
good
the
cost
of
repairs,
or
in
the
proper
circumstances,
S.G.I.
may
be
estopped
from
denying
it
is
liable
to
make
payment,
but
the
material
before
me
does
not
disclose
this
to
be
so
in
this
case.
The
Labour
Standards
Branch
argues
that
Revenue
Canada's
claim
arises
from
subsections
227(4)
and
(5)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act,
which
are
as
follows:
227(4)
Every
person
who
deducts
or
withholds
any
amount
under
this
Act
shall
be
deemed
to
hold
the
amount
so
deducted
or
withheld
in
trust
for
Her
Majesty.
227(5)
Amount
in
trust
not
part
of
estate.
Notwithstanding
any
provision
of
the
Bankruptcy
Act,
in
the
event
of
any
liquidation,
assignment,
receivership
or
bank*
ruptcy
of
or
by
a
person,
an
amount
equal
to
any
amount
(a)
deemed
by
subsection
(4)
to
be
held
in
trust
for
Her
Majesty,
or
(b)
deducted
or
withheld
under
an
Act
of
a
province
with
which
the
Minister
of
Finance
has
entered
into
an
agreement
for
the
collection
of
taxes
payable
to
the
province
under
that
Act
that
is
deemed
under
that
Act
to
be
held
in
trust
for
Her
Majesty
in
right
of
the
province
shall
be
deemed
to
be
separate
from
and
form
no
part
of
the
estate
in
liquidation,
assignment,
receivership
or
bankruptcy,
whether
or
not
that
amount
has
in
fact
been
kept
separate
and
apart
from
the
person's
own
moneys
or
from
the
assets
of
the
estate.
As
to
subsection
227(4),
the
trust
obligation
is
on
Custom
Classic
and
its
failure
to
deduct
is
of
no
consequence
to
S.G.I.
or
its
insured.
In
subsection
227(5),
a
reality
is
artificially
established
(accepting
for
the
moment
that
Custom
Classic
is
in
liquidation,
and
therefore
that
the
section
may
apply,
although
it
is
established
only
that
it
has
ceased
business).
The
section
deems
something
to
be
so
even
though
it
is
not
so.
Indeed,
that
is
the
essence
of
deeming:
it
declares
(for
purposes
of
the
law)
that
something
that
does
not
exist
does
exist,
or
that
something
that
is
one
thing
is
something
else.
Cave,
J.
expressed
it
in
The
Queen
v.
Norfolk
County
Council
(1891),
60
L.J.Q.B.
379
at
page
380:
.
.
.generally
speaking,
when
you
talk
of
a
thing
being
deemed
to
be
something,
you
do
not
mean
to
say
that
it
is
that
which
it
is
to
be
deemed
to
be.
It
is
rather
an
admission
that
it
is
not
what
it
is
to
be
deemed
to
be,
and
that,
notwithstanding
it
is
not
that
particular
thing,
nevertheless.
.
.it
is
to
be
deemed
to
be
that
thing.
Romer,
J.
did
not
much
like
this
idea
and
said
in
Batcheller
(Robert)
&
Sons,
Ltd.
v.
Batcheller,
[1945]
Ch.
169
at
page
176:
It
is,
of
course,
quite
permissible
to
"deem"
a
thing
to
have
happened
when
it
is
not
known
whether
it
happened
or
not.
It
is
an
unusual
but
not
an
impossible
conception
to
"deem"
that
a
thing
happened
when
it
is
known
positively
that
it
did
not
happen.
To
deem,
however,
that
a
thing
happened
when
not
only
is
it
known
that
it
did
not
happen,
but
it
is
positively
known
that
precisely
the
opposite
of
it
happened,
is
a
conception
which
to
my
mind
.
.
.
amounts
to
a
complete
absurdity.
For
myself,
I
note
with
interest
the
power
of
creation
or
transformation
which
the
word
"deem"
gives
when
this
instrument
(or
weapon)
is
seized
and
used
by
a
legislative
body.
A
useful
discussion
by
Madam
Justice
McLaughlin
is
found
in
British
Columbia
v.
Henfrey
Samson
Belair
Ltd.,
[1989]
2
S.C.R.
24,
59
D.L.R.
(4th)
726,
at
page
35
S.C.R.
where
the
province
sought
to
effect
a
similar
artificial
result
by
the
way
it
defined
"trust".
The
sections
must
be
strictly
applied.
Subsection
227(5)
identifies
the
yardstick
by
which
an
amount
is
deemed
to
be
separate
and
form
no
part
of
an
estate,
but
that
section
does
not
apply
to
any
asset
until
that
asset
forms
part
of
the
estate.
Under
subsection
227(5),
where
a
person
deducts
amounts,
those
amounts
are
deemed
to
be
held
separate
from
the
estate
even
where
they
are
mingled
with
other
assets
of
the
person's
estate.
I
do
not
see
how
a
deemed
separation
applies
under
that
section
to
any
amount
until
it
is
part
of
the
assets
of
the
estate,
and
it
is
not
part
of
the
estate
where
by
provincial
law
it
is
the
property
of
someone
else
or
is
subject
to
other
claims
before
payment
of
that
amount
is
required
to
be
made
to
the
person's
estate.
Accordingly
I
hold
that:
(a)
S.G.I.
is
not
liable
to
Custom
Classic,
although
it
would
have
been
likely
to
pay
Custom
Classic,
and
(b)
The
result
of
this
conclusion
is
not
affected
by
subsections
227(4)
and
227(5).
Subsection
56(1)
of
the
Labour
Standards
Act
is
as
follows:
56.(1)
In
this
section:
(a)
purchase-money
security
interest"
means:
(i)
a
security
interest
that
is
taken
or
reserved
by
a
seller
of
a
personal
property
to
secure
payment
of
all
or
part
of
its
sale
price;
or
(ii)
a
security
interest
that
is
taken
by
a
person
who
gives
value
for
the
purpose
of
enabling
the
debtor
to
acquire
rights
in
or
to
the
personal
property,
to
the
extent
that
the
value
is
applied
to
acquire
such
rights;
(b)
"security
interest"
means
an
interest
in
property
that
secures
payment
or
performance
of
an
obligation.
(1.1)
Notwithstanding
any
other
Act,
every
employer
shall
hold
all
wages
accruing
due
or
due
to
an
employee
in
trust
for
the
employee
for
the
payment
of
those
wages
in
the
manner
and
at
the
time
provided
under
this
Act
and
the
regulations,
and,
in
the
event
that
such
wages
are
not
held
in
trust,
the
employer
is
deemed
to
hold
an
amount
equal
to
the
amount
of
wages
in
trust
for
the
employee.
(1.2)
Wages
accruing
due
or
due
to
an
employee
are
deemed
to
be
secured
by
a
security
interest
upon
the
property
and
assets
of
the
employer
of
his
estate,
whether
or
not
such
property
or
assets
are
subject
to
other
security
interests,
and
the
security
interest
for
wages
is
payable
in
priority
to
any
other
claim
or
right
in
the
property
or
assets,
including
any
claim
or
right
of
the
Crown
in
right
of
Saskatchewan,
and,
without
limiting
the
generality
of
the
foregoing,
that
priority
extends
over
every
security
interest,
lien,
charge,
encumbrance,
mortgage,
assignment,
including
an
assignment
of
book
debts,
debenture
or
other
security,
whether
perfected
within
the
meaning
of
The
Personal
Property
Security
Act
or
not,
made
or
given,
accepted
or
issued
before
or
after
the
wages
accrued
due,
without
registration
or
other
perfection
of
the
deemed
security
interest
for
wages.
(1.3)
Notwithstanding
subsection
(1.2),
the
charge
mentioned
in
that
subsection
does
not
take
priority
over:
(a)
a
purchase-money
security
interest
that
is:
(i)
taken
prior
to
the
wages'
accruing
due;
(ii)
registered
within
the
time
periods
mentioned
in
section
21
of
The
Personal
Property
Security
Act;
(b)
a
mortgage
of
real
property
granted
by
an
employer
prior
to
the
wages’
accruing
due;
(c)
the
interest
of
a
seller
under
an
agreement
for
sale
of
real
property
or
under
a
mortgage
back
arrangement
or
the
interest
of
a
person
who
gives
value
for
the
purpose
of
enabling
an
employer
to
acquire
rights
in
real
property,
to
the
extent
that
the
value
is
applied
to
acquire
such
rights.
This
section
imposes
an
obligation
on
Custom
Classic
to
hold
wages
in
trust
for
employees
and,
inferentially,
not
to
use
such
moneys,
or
assets
secured
for
payment
of
such
wages,
in
retirement
of
other
debts
of
the
employer,
Custom
Classic,
but
Custom
Classic's
claim
for
an
asset
such
as
a
debt
due
from
a
payor
is
subject
to
any
claims
which
the
payor
may
offset
against
that
debt.
I
do
not
see
that
this
provision
was
intended
to
interfere
with
ordinary
commerce.
The
insured
sought
repairs
from
Custom
Classic
and
is
expected
to
pay
Custom
Classic,
without
obliging
him
to
consider
whether
those
moneys
are
part
of
a
trust
of
which
he
or
Custom
Classic
is
the
trustee.
Section
56(1.1)
binds
Custom
Classic"to
hold
all
wages.
.
.in
trust.
.
.
.”
It
has
no
effect
on
the
insured
or
S.G.I.
Therefore,
before
determining
whether
or
not
moneys
are
available
to
Custom
Classic
for
purposes
of
those
sections,
it
is
necessary
to
consider
the
provisions
of
the
Workers’
Compensation
Act.
Subsections
(1)
and
(3)
of
section
133
of
the
Workers’
Compensation
Act
are
as
follows:
133.(1)
Where
a
person,
whether
carrying
on
an
industry
included
under
this
Act
or
not,
in
this
section
referred
to
as
the
principal,
contracts
with
any
other
person,
in
this
section
referred
to
as
the
contractor,
for
the
execution
by
or
under
the
contractor
of
the
whole
or
any
part
of
any
work
for
the
principal,
it
is
the
duty
of
the
principal
to
ensure
that
any
sum
that
the
contractor
or
any
subcontractor
is
liable
to
contribute
to
the
fund
is
paid
and,
where
the
principal
fails
to
do
so
and
the
sum
is
not
paid,
he
is
personally
liable
to
pay
that
sum
to
the
board.
(3)
Where
the
principal
is
liable
to
make
payment
to
the
board
under
subsection
(1),
he
in
entitled
to
be
indemnified
by
a
person
who
should
have
made
the
payment
and
is
entitled
to
withhold,
out
of
any
indebtedness
due
to
that
person,
a
sufficient
amount
in
respect
of
that
indemnity.
S.G.I.
does
not
qualify
as
a
principal
in
this
section
because
it
did
not
contract
with
Custom
Classic
for
the
execution
of
any
work.
Each
insured
is
a
principal
under
this
section
and
each
insured
who
fails
to
comply
therewith
is
personally
liable
to
pay
the
appropriate
sum
to
the
Workers'
Compensation
Board.
This
is
not
a
deemed
debt.
Although
it
is
a
debt
statutorily
created,
it
arises
from
the
failure
of
the
principal
to
carry
out
his
obligations
in
relation
to
the
contractor.
Each
insured
is
entitled
to
save
himself
harmless
from
any
claim
under
section
133.
The
engagement
of
the
repairer
by
an
insured
carries
with
it
the
right
to
withhold
under
subsection
133(3)
the
amount
necessary
to
comply
with
subsection
133(1).
S.G.I.
undoubtedly
would
wish
to
draw
to
the
attention
of
its
insured
(before
obtaining
directions
to
pay
Custom
Classic)
that
each
is
entitled
to
withhold
the
appropriate
amount
under
subsection
133(3).
Of
course,
the
authorization
to
S.G.I.
may
imply
that
payment
to
the
Workers'
Compensation
Board
is
to
be
made
before
any
moneys
are
payable
to
the
contractor
or
any
person
Claiming
by
or
through
the
contractor.
For
convenience,
and
assuming
that
each
insured
is
entitled
to
save
himself
harmless
under
subsection
133(3)
of
the
Workers’
Compensation
Act,
I
would
direct
that
the
amount
of
the
Workers'
Compensation
claim
be
paid
to
the
Workers'
Compensation
Board.
The
remainder
is
an
asset
of
Custom
Classic,
being
amounts
owing
to
it
from
the
various
insured,
and
such
amounts
are
subject
to
the
provisions
of
subsection
56(1.2)
of
the
Labour
Standards
Act,
as
amended
by
S.S.
1976-77,
c.
36
and
S.S.
1979-80,
c.
92.
These
amounts
have
been
paid
into
Court,
and
may
be
the
object
of
a
further
application.
S.G.I.
alleges
no
interest
in
the
moneys,
and
may
complete
its
interpleader
by
delivering
to
each
of
the
other
parties
to
this
proceeding
a
notice
giving
this
information:
(a)
the
name
and
address
of
each
insured;
(b)
the
amount
of
money
paid
by
S.G.I.
to
satisfy
its
obligation
to
each
insured.
It
will
then
have
satisfied
its
obligation
as
interpleader.
No
payment
shall
be
made
until
the
expiration
of
15
days
following
delivery
of
this
judgment.
Order
accordingly.