A-247-94
CORAM:STRAYER, J.A.
LINDEN, J.A.
McDONALD, J.A.
B E T W E E N:
THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF NATIONAL
REVENUE
FOR CUSTOMS
AND EXCISE
Appellant,
-and-
PIGMALION
SERVICES
Respondent.
HEARD at Toronto, Ontario, Monday, October 20,
1997.
JUDGMENT delivered from the Bench at Toronto,
Ontario, on Monday, October 20, 1997.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: STRAYER,
J.A.
A-247-94
CORAM:STRAYER, J.A.
LINDEN, J.A.
McDONALD, J.A.
B E T W E E N:
THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF NATIONAL
REVENUE
FOR CUSTOMS
AND EXCISE
Appellant,
-and-
PIGMALION
SERVICES
Respondent.
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered from the
Bench, at Toronto, Ontario
on
Monday, October 20, 1997)
STRAYER, J.A.:
We are all of the view that this
appeal must be dismissed. We admit to some difficulty in understanding the
reasons for decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal. The reasons
of the Tribunal are not fully explained and in the last paragraph are
ambiguous, unclear, and possibly contradictory with what precedes.
Nevertheless, we believe that the learned Trial Judge on the appeal from the
Tribunal on questions of law came to the right result in confirming the Tribunal's
order. This is so even if, as the appellant has argued, she misinterpreted
one of the Tribunal's determinations of questions of law. She did what she was
authorized to do under subsection 68(2) of the Customs Act in dismissing
the appeal on the basis of her own legal interpretation.
We wish to make two further
observations. First, the learned Trial Judge confirmed the Tribunal's
interpretation of the term "packaging" because it was not
"patently unreasonable." As the matter came before her on an appeal
of a question of law, under a right of appeal to which no privative clause
applies, the test of "patent unreasonability" may not have been
appropriate. Nevertheless, as this involved an appeal from a specialized
tribunal, it would appear from recent jurisdiction that some deference was
indeed owed to the Tribunal even on interpretations of law. We accordingly do not
believe that this result was incorrect, however the standard of review was
articulated by the Trial Judge.
Secondly, counsel for the respondent
has objected, before the Trial Judge and before us, to issues being argued by
the appellant which were not covered by the terms on which leave to appeal was
granted. Having regard to our views of the merits of the appeal, we did not
consider it necessary to hear counsel for the respondent on this point, nor to
decide specifically whether the new issues could be entertained.
The appeal should therefore be
dismissed with costs.
"B.L. Strayer" J.A.
Names of Counsel
and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: A-247-94
STYLE OF CAUSE: THE
DEPUTY MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE FOR CUSTOMS AND EXCISE
-
and -
PIGMALION
SERVICES
DATE OF HEARING: OCTOBER
20, 1997
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO,
ONTARIO
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: STRAYER, J.A.
Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario
on Monday, October 20, 1997
APPEARANCES:
Mr.
John B. Edmond
For
the Appellant
Mr.
Bruce W. Cameron
For
the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Department
of Justice
Room
558, Justice Bldg.
239
Wellington Street
Ottawa,
Ontario
K1A
0H8
For
the Appellant
Lang
Michener
BCE
Place, P.O. Box 747
Suite
2500
181
Bay Street
Toronto,
Ontario
M5J
2T7
For
the Respondent
FEDERAL
COURT OF CANADA
Court No.: A-247-94
Between:
THE
DEPUTY MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE FOR CUSTOMS AND EXCISE
Appellant
-
and -
PIGMALION
SERVICES
Respondent
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT
Email this Content