Cases
The Queen v. Canadian General Electric Co. Ltd., 87 DTC 5070, [1987] 1 CTC 180 (FCA)
A federal Crown corporation ("AECL") was the exclusive purchaser of the heavy water produced by the taxpayer and had decided to build a heavy...
Dauphinee v. The Queen, 80 DTC 6267, [1980] CTC 332 (FCTD)
The rights to inventions made by the taxpayers vested in the federal Crown because they made the inventions within the scope of their employment...
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 5 - Subsection 5(1) | 107 |
Canadian Industries Ltd. v. The Queen, 80 DTC 6163, [1980] CTC 222 (FCA)
The granting by the taxpayer to the U.S. government of a non-exclusive license to use patents concerning a process for the manufacture of TNT and...
Porta-Test Systems Ltd. v. The Queen, 80 DTC 6046, [1980] CTC 71 (FCTD)
The taxpayer granted a U.K. company the exclusive right to manufacture, use and sell specified inventions of the taxpayer in the U.K. in return...
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 12 - Subsection 12(1) - Paragraph 12(1)(g) | 59 |
See Also
Murray v. Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd. (1967), 44 TC 175 (CA)
The taxpayer, which had been granted the exclusive world-wide licence to exploit the master patent for "Terylene" and was the owner of ancillary...
Musker v. English Electric Co. Ltd., 41 TC 556 (HL)
Sums received by the taxpayer for licensing its "manufacturing technique" for the Canberra Bomber to a number of foreign licensees were found to...
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 248 - Subsection 248(1) - Property | know-how not property | 112 |
Jeffrey v. Rolls - Royce, Ltd. (1961), 40 TC 443 (HL)
The taxpayer, which was a manufacturer of automobiles and airplane engines, received various sums pursuant to purported licences of know-how to...
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 111 - Subsection 111(5) - Paragraph 111(5)(a) | 74 |
Evans Medical Supplies, Ltd. v. Moriarty (1958), 36 TC 207 (HL)
A lump sum received by a company that sold to the Burmese government a secret process upon which the success of its business in Burma had to...
Rustproof Metal Window Co. Ltd. v. C.I.R., [1947] 2 All ER 454, 29 TC 243 (CA)
The taxpayer, which had acquired letters patent relating to a galvanizing process, granted to a manufacturer of ammunition boxes a licence to use...
Magerison v. Tyresoles, Ltd. (1942), 25 TC 59 (KBD)
The taxpayer, which was the owner of a patented process for the re-treading of old tires, entered into agreements with a minimum term of five...
British Salmson Aero Engines, Ltd. v. C.I.R. (1938), 22 TC 29 (CA)
The taxpayer, an English company, was not required to deduct income tax on a lump sum payable (in three instalments) to a French company for a...
Desoutter Bros. Ltd. v. J.E. Hanger & Co., Ltd., [1936] 1 All ER 535 (QBD)
The plaintiff granted a licence to the defendants for a period of five years to make and sell artificial legs pursuant to a patent of the...
Mills v. Jones (1929), 14 TC 769 (HL)
The taxpayer received government compensation in respect of the past, present and future use by the British Government of the taxpayer's patent...
Rees Roturbo Development Syndicate, Ltd. v. Ducker (1928), 13 TC 366 (HL)
The taxpayer, which was formed for the purpose of acquiring and exploiting patents and licences and which licensed its patent rights to foreign...
Constantinesco v. Rex. (1926), 11 TC 730 (HL)
An award of £70,000 that the taxpayer received after the First World War in respect of the compulsory use of its patent for an interrupter gear...
Collins v. Firth-Brearley Stainless Steel Syndicate, Ltd. (1925), 9 TC 520 (CA)
The taxpayer, which was incorporated for the purpose of exploiting a patent for stainless steel which (by the time of the appeal to the...
British Dyestuffs Corp. v. C.I.R. (1924), 12 TC 586 (CA)
The taxpayer and an American Company ("DuPont") entered into an agreement under which each undertook to communicate particulars of patents and...
Administrative Policy
11 March 2025 External T.I. 2020-0845931E5 F - Transfert d’une propriété intellectuelle
In order to incentivize its researchers, a university gives its researchers the right to receive 50% of the net income arising from the...
5 January 2012 External T.I. 2011-0412581E5 - Right to use a patent - eligible property
respecting a licensing by a Canadian corporation of the use of its patent for specified purposes for a limited period to another taxable Canadian...
1996 Ontario Tax Conference Round Table, "Purchase and Sale of Computer Software, Q. 5", 1997 Canadian Tax Journal, Vol. 45, No. 1, at p. 221
Where the development costs of computer software were claimed as a deduction under s. 37(1)(b), proceeds of disposition of the software will be on...
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 37 - Subsection 37(6) | 32 |
Commentary
Proceeds of disposition v. receipts for exploitation of patents
The disposition of a patent or other intellectual property will be on capital...