Date: 20090520
Docket: T-878-08
Citation: 2009 FC 516
BETWEEN:
LOCATION ROBERT LTÉE
Plaintiff
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Defendant
Docket:
T-879-08
BETWEEN:
TRANSPORT ROBERT (1973) LTÉE
Plaintiff
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Defendant
REASONS FOR ORDER
(Reasons
delivered from the bench at Montréal on May 14, 2009)
HUGESSEN D.J.
[1]
Even assuming that the plaintiffs, at trial,
would be able to prove the allegations at the basis of their claim for a refund
of taxes, I am satisfied that these claims must fail.
[2]
The claims are based on an alleged submission
made by a public servant, a representative of the Ministère du Revenu, to the
effect that the plaintiffs should not file other claims for a refund of the excise
taxes paid on the fuel contained in the tanks of the trucks that they exported
from Canada for the years subsequent to 1993.
[3]
In 2003, Parliament adopted the Budget
Implementation Act, 2003, S.C., 2003, c. 15 and, in this Act, it completely
eliminated the right of taxpayers to claim excise taxes paid in the
circumstances alleged by the plaintiffs, starting from the date of the budget in
February 2003.
[4]
This is not a case of a limitation period or a time
limit. This is simply the elimination of a right previously held by taxpayers.
[5]
That Parliament has this right is not in
question and, moreover, this right is formally expressed in section 42 of the Interpretation
Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-21:
|
42. (1) Every Act shall be so
construed as to reserve to Parliament the power of repealing or amending it,
and of revoking, restricting or modifying any power, privilege or advantage
thereby vested in or granted to any person.
(2) An Act may be amended or repealed by
an Act passed in the same session of Parliament.
(3) An amending
enactment, as far as consistent with the tenor thereof, shall be construed as
part of the enactment that it amends.
|
42. (1)
Il est entendu que le Parlement peut toujours abroger ou modifier toute loi
et annuler ou modifier tous pouvoirs, droits ou avantages attribués par cette
loi.
(2) Une loi peut être modifiée ou abrogée
par une autre loi adoptée au cours de la même session du Parlement.
(3) Le texte modificatif, dans la mesure
compatible avec sa teneur, fait partie du texte modifié.
|
[6]
Therefore, once royal assent was given to the Act
in question, the plaintiffs no longer had any right to claim the tax payments
that are the subject of their claim and, as I said in the beginning, their
actions must fail.
[7]
I will accept the defendant’s motion for summary
judgment in the two actions. I will allow such motions and dismiss the actions.
[8]
I will mitigate the plaintiffs’ costs in the
circumstances of the case and I will award the costs of the action totalling $500
in fees plus disbursements in one of the files and no fees in the other file.
“James K. Hugessen”
Certified true
translation
Janine Anderson,
Translator
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKETS: T-878-08 and T-879-08
STYLES OF CAUSE: LOCATION
ROBERT LTÉE v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
AND
TRANSPORT
ROBERT (1973) LTÉE v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE OF
HEARING: Montréal,
Quebec
DATE OF
HEARING: May
14, 2009
REASONS FOR
ORDER: HUGESSEN D.J.
DATED: May
20, 2009
APPEARANCES:
|
Serge Fournier
|
FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
|
|
Stéphane Dion
Jean-Robert
Noiseux
|
FOR THE DEFENDANT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
|
BCF
s.e.n.c.r.l.
Montréal, Quebec
|
FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
|
|
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE DEFENDANT
|
Email this Content