E.H. Price Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, (1983) 47 N.R. 312 (FCA)
|Judge:||Pratte, Urie, JJ., and Clement, D.J.|
|Court:||Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)|
|Case Date:||May 31, 1983|
|Citations:||(1983), 47 N.R. 312 (FCA)|
E.H. Price Ltd. v. MNR (1983), 47 N.R. 312 (FCA)
MLB headnote and full text
E.H. Price Limited v. Minister of National Revenue
Indexed As: E.H. Price Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue
Federal Court of Appeal
Pratte, Urie, JJ., and Clement, D.J.
May 31, 1983.
A manufacturer claimed that the Minister of National Revenue was barred from collecting excise tax owing by a limitation period. The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, in a judgment unreported in this series of reports held that there was no limitation period applicable for the collection of taxes and penalties under the Excise Tax Act. The manufacturer appealed. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
Sales and Service Taxes - Topic 390
Sales tax - Practice - Limitation periods - The Federal Court of Appeal held that there was no limitation period applicable to an action for the collection of taxes and penalties under the Excise Tax Act.
Statutes - Topic 1622
Interpretation - Extrinsic aids - Other statutes - Similar statutes - The meaning of the phrase "at any time" in a statute was in issue and it was submitted that other statutes using the phrase were relevant - The Federal Court of Appeal held that other statutes were relevant only if they were in pari materia - See paragraph 17.
Statutes - Topic 1624
Interpretation - Extrinsic aids - Other statutes - Prior statutes respecting same subject matter - The Federal Court of Appeal considered prior versions of s. 52(1) of the Excise Tax Act in construing the section - See paragraphs 9 to 12.
Statutes - Topic 1625
Interpretation - Extrinsic aids - Other statutes - Subsequent statutes respecting same subject matter - Amendments - The Federal Court of Appeal refused to consider an amendment to a section in determining the meaning of the section before the amendment was made - See paragraph 18.
Words and Phrases
Proceeding in the court - The Federal Court of Appeal held that a certificate respecting taxes, interest and penalties owing under the Excise Tax Act, which is registered in the Federal Court of Canada under s. 52(4) was a proceeding, but was not a proceeding in the court within the meaning of s. 38 of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970, 2nd. Supp., c. 10 - See paragraph 6.
Royce v. Municipality of Macdonald (1909), 12 W.L.R. 347, appld. [para. 6].
R. v. Parker (1981) 2 C.E.R. 181, appld. [para. 6].
Twinriver Timber Ltd. v. R. in Right of British Columbia (1980), 15 B.C.L.R. 38, affd. 25 B.C.L.R. 175, appld. [para. 8].
Attorney General v. Brown,  1 K.B.D. 773, consd. [para. 9].
The Canadian Northern Railway Co. et al. v. The King (1922), 44 S.C.R. 264, consd. [para. 10].
Grey v. Pearson (1857), 6 H.L. Cas. 61, consd. [para. 10].
Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. E-13, sect. 52 [para. 5].
Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970, 2nd. Supp., c. 10, sect. 38 [para. 4].
Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. I-23, sect. 16 [para. 10].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Craies on Statute Law (7th Ed.), pp. 133, 134 [para. 17].
J. Barry Hughes, Q.C., for the appellant;
Harry Glinter, for the respondent.
This case was heard on April 13 and 14, 1983, at Winnipeg, Manitoba, before PRATTE, URIE, JJ., and CLEMENT, D.J., of the Federal Court of Appeal.
On May 31, 1983, CLEMENT, D.J., delivered the following judgment for the Federal Court of Appeal:
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP