Strayer,
J.:—This
is
an
application
by
the
defendant
requesting
that
the
Court
order
the
plaintiff
to
provide
very
extensive
particulars
prior
to
the
defendant
filing
its
defence.
I
have
concluded
that
this
motion
is
unwarranted.
The
statement
of
claim
adequately
sets
out
the
basis
of
the
plaintiff
Band’s
claim,
which
as
I
understand
it
essentially
is
that
it
has
purchased
personal
property
produced
or
manufactured
in
Canada,
which
property
has
been
used
or
consumed
on
its
reserve,
and
that
it
is
entitled
to
a
refund
of
taxes
received
by
the
defendant
under
the
Excise
Tax
Act
in
respect
of
such
property.
It
bases
its
claim
on
certain
tax
exemptions
provided
for
Indians
in
section
87
of
the
Indian
Act.
It
claims
this
exemption
and
refund
either
with
respect
to
all
such
goods
used
or
consumed
on
the
reserve,
or
in
the
alternative
with
respect
to
all
such
goods
the
property
in
which
has
passed
and
delivery
of
which
was
made,
to
the
Band
on
the
reserve.
The
defendant
has
demanded
particulars
in
great
detail
about
the
nature
of
all
such
goods,
their
date
of
purchase,
the
name
and
nature
of
the
vendor,
the
price
and
by
whom
and
when
it
was
paid,
whether
and
by
whom
a
consumption
or
sales
tax
was
paid,
etc.
Some
of
the
particulars
demanded
simply
assume
the
statement
of
claim
is
false,
such
as
those
which
ask
about
country
of
origin
of
goods
or
where
the
goods
were
used
or
consumed.
Such
particulars
are
unnecessary
and
inappropriate
at
this
stage.
Counsel
for
the
defendant
demonstrated
that
it
believes
it
has
several
defences
to
the
action.
It
appears
to
want
the
plaintiff
to
provide
such
particulars
now
so
that
it
can
rely
on
these
as
the
basis
for
its
defence.
The
Court
need
not
and
should
not
require
the
plaintiff
to
provide
such
particulars.
I
can
see
no
reason
why
the
defendant
cannot
prepare
a
statement
of
defence
making
all
the
allegations
of
facts
which
it
obviously
thinks
such
particulars
would
provide.
It
can
then,
once
it
has
established
the
relevance
of
such
issues
to
the
pleadings,
invoke
Rule
465(15)
to
justify
questions
about
these
matters
on
examination
for
discovery.
Indeed,
until
it
does
plead
I
should
think
it
would
be
difficult
to
force
answers
on
an
examination
for
discovery
of
the
plaintiff
prior
to
filing
a
defence,
on
any
“allegations
of
fact”
that
are
not
contained
in
the
statement
of
claim
—
the
only
pleading
so
far
filed.
The
application
will
therefore
be
dismissed
with
costs.
Application
dismissed.
Email this Content