Canada (Attorney General) v. Zurich Indemnity Co. of Canada, [2003] O.T.C. 139 (SC)

• Judge: Cameron, J.
• Court: Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
• Case Date: February 24, 2003
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: [2003] O.T.C. 139 (SC)

Can. (A.G.) v. Zurich Indemnity Co., [2003] O.T.C. 139 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] O.T.C. TBEd. FE.108

Attorney General of Canada (plaintiff) v. Zurich Indemnity Company of Canada (defendant)

(Court File No. 99-CV-172573)

Indexed As: Canada (Attorney General) v. Zurich Indemnity Co. of Canada

Court of Ontario

Superior Court of Justice

Cameron, J.

February 24, 2003.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Customs - Topic 6208

Payment of duty - General - Bonded goods (incl. liability of surety) - See paragraphs 1 to 96.

Cases Noticed:

Fuller (Thomas) Construction Co. (1958) Ltd. v. Continental Insurance Co., [1973] 3 O.R. 202 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 50].

Coles v. Pack (1869), L.R. 5 C.P. 65, refd to. [para. 50].

Johns Manville International Inc. v. Minister of National Revenue (Customs and Excise), [1999] 3 F.C. 95; 171 F.T.R. 224 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 67].

Marigold Holdings Ltd. and Riverview Place Apartment Ltd. v. Norem Construction Ltd. (1988), 89 A.R. 81 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 79].

Doe v. Canadian Surety Co., [1937] S.C.R. 1, refd to. [para. 84].

Holme v. Brunskill (1878), 3 Q.B.D. 495, refd to. [para. 84].

Citadel General Assurance Co. v. Johns- Manville Canada Inc. et al., [1983] 1 S.C.R. 513; 47 N.R. 280, refd to. [para. 85].

Statutes Noticed:

Customs Act, R.S.C. 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 1, sect. 107(1)(a), sect. 108(1)(c), sect. 108(2), sect. 108(3) [para. 65].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Scott, K.W., Scott and Reynolds on Surety Bonds (1999 Looseleaf), pp. 2-45.6, s. 2.5 [para. 85]; 10-22, s. 10.4(e) [para. 84]; 10-24 [para. 85].

Counsel:

P. Christopher Parke, for the plaintiff;

Ronald Birken, for the defendant.

This matter was heard on February 4, 5 and 6, 2003, before Cameron, J., of the Ontario Superior Court, who released the following decision on February 24, 2003.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.