Chisholm (Ronald A.) Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue (Customs and Excise) et al., (1986) 5 F.T.R. 1 (TD)

• Judge: Strayer, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: May 09, 1986
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1986), 5 F.T.R. 1 (TD)

Chisholm Ltd. v. MNR (1986), 5 F.T.R. 1 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Ronald A. Chisholm Ltd. v. Deputy Minister of National Revenue for Customs and Excise and Canadian Cattlemen's Association

T-2936-85

Indexed As: Chisholm (Ronald A.) Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue (Customs and Excise) et al.

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Strayer, J.

May 20, 1986.

Summary:

The Deputy Minister of National Revenue for Customs and Excise pursuant to s. 31(1) of the Special Import Measures Act initiated an investigation into the alleged dumping of boneless manufacturing beef from the European Economic Community. An interested importer applied for certiorari to quash the Deputy Minister's decision.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the importer's application to quash.

Administrative Law - Topic 1061

Classification of power or function - Powers or functions classified as administrative - Investigations and determinations of dumping - The Special Import Measures Act, s. 31(1), required the Deputy Minister of National Revenue for Customs and Excise to initiate an investigation where in his opinion there was evidence that goods were being dumped or subsidized in a manner that would cause material injury - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that a decision by the Deputy Minister to initiate such an investigation was an administrative decision - See paragraph 5.

Administrative Law - Topic 2270

Natural justice - Duty of fairness - Powers to which duty does not apply - The Special Import Measures Act, s. 31(1), required the Deputy Minister of National Revenue for Customs and Excise to initiate an investigation where in his opinion there was evidence that goods were being subsidized or dumped in a manner which would cause material injury - The Deputy Minister initiated such an investigation without first hearing the submission of an interested importer - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that the Deputy Minister complied with the requirements of the Act, which overrode any common law duty of fairness - The court held further, however, that there was no denial of fairness in any event, because the Deputy Minister in initiating the investigation was making an administrative decision where the duty of fairness did not require him to hear such preliminary submissions - See paragraphs 3 to 5.

Administrative Law - Topic 5003

Judicial review - Certiorari - When available - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that it would exercise its discretion against granting certiorari, even where certiorari was an appropriate remedy, where: (1) there was a delay by the applicant in seeking prerogative relief, (2) the decision sought to be quashed had been acted upon, and (3) a federal tribunal was about to hold a hearing on the substantive issue involved whereat the applicant had status to be heard - See paragraph 6.

Customs - Topic 9623

Anti-dumping legislation - Dumping and subsidy investigations - Initiation of investigation - Evidence necessary - The Special Import Measures Act, s. 31(1), required the Deputy Minister of National Revenue for Customs and Excise to initiate an investigation where he was of the opinion that there was evidence that goods were being dumped or subsidized in a manner likely to cause material injury - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, stated that "first it must be noted that there is no absolute requirement that such evidence exist but only that the Deputy Minister be 'of the opinion' that it exists. Further, there is no requirement that the evidence in question be conclusive or probative on a balance of probabilities, or that it meet any particular standard" - See paragraph 2.

Customs - Topic 9623

Anti-dumping legislation - Dumping and subsidy investigation - Initiation of investigation - Evidence necessary - The Special Import Measures Act, s. 31(1), required the Deputy Minister of National Revenue for Customs and Excise to initiate an investigation where in his opinion goods were being dumped or subsidized in a manner likely to cause material injury - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, examined a decision by the Deputy Minister to initiate such an investigation and held that there was sufficient evidence to justify his decision - See paragraphs 1, 2.

Customs - Topic 9623

Anti-dumping legislation - Dumping and subsidy investigations - Initiation of investigation - Duty of fairness - The Special Import Measures Act, s. 31(1), required the Deputy Minister of National Revenue for Customs and Excise to initiate an investigation where in his opinion there was evidence that goods were being subsidized or dumped in a manner likely to cause material injury - The Deputy Minister initiated such an investigation without first hearing the submission of an interested importer - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that the Deputy Minister complied with the requirements of the Act which overrode any common law duty of fairness - The court held however that there was no denial of fairness in any event because the Deputy Minister in initiating the investigation was making an administrative decision where the duty of fairness did not require him to hear such preliminary submissions - See paragraphs 3 to 5.

Cases Noticed:

Sabre International, Re (1974), 6 N.R. 339; 52 D.L.R.(3d) 156 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

Statutes Noticed:

Special Import Measures Act, S.C. 1984, c. 25, sect. 31(1).

Counsel:

D. Pearson and P. Kirby, for the petitioner;

Andre Bluteau, for the respondent, Deputy Minister of National Revenue;

M. Flavell, for the respondent, Canadian Cattlemen's Association.

Solicitors of Record:

Gottlieb, Kaylor & Stocks, Montreal, Quebec, for the petitioner;

Frank Iacobucci, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of Canada, for the respondent, Deputy Minister of National Revenue;

Clarkson, Tetrault, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent, Canadian Cattlemen's Association.

This application was heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 9, 1986, before Strayer, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision on May 20, 1986: