Municipal Contracting Ltd. v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General),

• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Judge: Glube, C.J.N.S., Chipman and Bateman, JJ.A.
• Neutral Citation: 2003 NSCA 10
• Citation: (2003), 212 N.S.R.(2d) 36 (CA),2003 NSCA 10,[2003] NSJ No 26 (QL),212 NSR (2d) 36,665 APR 36,(2003), 212 NSR(2d) 36 (CA),212 N.S.R.(2d) 36,665 A.P.R. 36,212 NSR(2d) 36,[2003] NS.J. No 26 (QL)
• Date: 10 October 2002
• Court: Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada)

Municipal Contracting v. N.S. (A.G.) (2003), 212 N.S.R.(2d) 36 (CA);

 665 A.P.R. 36

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. FE.030

Municipal Contracting Limited, as agent for and on behalf of Municipal Enterprises Limited (appellant) v. The Attorney General of Nova Scotia, representing Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Nova Scotia (respondent)

(CA 179154; 2003 NSCA 10)

Indexed As: Municipal Contracting Ltd. v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General)

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

Glube, C.J.N.S., Chipman and Bateman, JJ.A.

January 22, 2003.

Summary:

Municipal operated a quarry and manu­factured crushed rock for sale. Municipal applied for a declaration that quarry equip­ment was machinery or apparatus used in the manufacture or production of goods for sale within the meaning of ss. 11(2)(h)(iii) and 12(1)(k)(iii) of the Gasoline and Diesel Oil Tax Act Regulations. Municipal applied for certiorari to quash the decision of the Pro­vincial Tax Commissioner denying its re­quest for refunds of diesel fuel tax.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a judgment reported 110 N.S.R.(2d) 45; 299 A.P.R. 45, allowed the application, quashed the Provincial Tax Commissioner's decision and granted declaratory relief. The Minister appealed.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Appeal Division, in a decision reported at 113 N.S.R.(2d) 174; 309 A.P.R. 174, allowed the appeal. The court held that there was no actual decision of the provincial Minister of Finance upon which to base the certiorari ap­plication. The Minister subsequently denied all the refund claims. The plaintiff sued to obtain the refunds.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at 199 N.S.R.(2d) 362; 623 A.P.R. 362, dismissed the action. The plain­tiff appealed.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dis­missed the appeal.

Estoppel - Topic 377

Estoppel by record (res judicata) - Res judicata as a bar to subsequent proceedings - When applicable - The plaintiff was granted certiorari quashing a decision of the Provincial Tax Commissioner denying its request for refunds of diesel fuel tax - The Court of Appeal overturned the de­cision on the procedural ground that there was no actual decision of the Minister of Finance upon which to base the application - The Minister subsequently denied the re­fund claims - The plaintiff sued to obtain the refunds and argued, inter alia, that the doctrine of issue estoppel precluded reliti­gation of the substantive issue between the parties - The trial judge rejected the argu­ment - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal affirmed the trial judge's decision - The first decision was a nullity and res judicata did not apply - See paragraphs 39 to 40.

Estoppel - Topic 386

Estoppel by record (res judicata) - Res judicata as a bar to subsequent proceedings - Issues decided in prior proceedings - [See Estoppel - Topic 377 ].

Sales and Service Taxes - Topic 83

Sales tax - Taxing powers - Interpretation -In case of doubt or ambiguity - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that the re­sidual presumption in favour of a taxpayer only applied when all other means of statu­tory interpretation had been exhausted - See paragraphs 53 to 58.

Sales and Service Taxes - Topic 2743

Gasoline and motive fuel tax - Exemptions - Use in manufacture or production of goods for sale - Taxing statutes - Section 12(k)(iii) of the Gasoline and Diesel Oil Tax Act Regulations provided that where equipment was used in the "manufacture or production of goods for sale" the gas used was exempt from tax, subject to s. 14 - Section 14(d) took away the exemption where the gasoline was used "in the pro­duction or processing of non-renewable resources" - Section 1(1)(mc) provided that "'production or processing' means explora­tion for, extraction of, or transformation or conversion of any non-renewable resource to the extent and in the manner determined by these regulations" - The trial judge held that notwithstanding that the Regulations did not go on to address the "extent" or "manner" of any activity in connection with any non-renewable resource, where the gasoline was used in the production or processing of non-renewable resources, s. 14(d) operated to take away the exemption in s. 12(1)(k)(iii) - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal affirmed the decision.

Statutes - Topic 522

Interpretation - General principles - Taxing statutes - [See Sales and Service Taxes - Topic 83 ].

Statutes - Topic 1449

Interpretation - Construction where mean­ing is not plain - Aids or methods to deter­mine meaning - Legislative history - Gen­eral - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that a trial judge did not err in relying on the legislative history as one indication of the intent of the 1982 Gasoline and Diesel Oil Tax Act Regulations (N.S.) - See paragraphs 59 to 64.

Cases Noticed:

Stubart Investments Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 536; 53 N.R. 241, refd to. [paras. 17, 100].

Québec (Communauté urbaine) et autres v. Corporation Notre-Dame de Bon Secours, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 3; 171 N.R. 161; 63 Q.A.C. 161, refd to. [paras. 18, 100].

Minister of National Revenue v. Shell Canada Ltd., [1999] 3 S.C.R. 622; 247 N.R. 19, refd to. [paras. 44, 99].

65302 British Columbia Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 804; 248 N.R. 216, refd to. [paras. 44, 99].

Canada v. Antosko, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 312; 168 N.R. 16, refd to. [paras. 44, 100].

Singleton v. Minister of National Revenue, [2001] 2 S.C.R. 1046; 275 N.R. 133, refd to. [paras. 45, 99].

Minister of National Revenue (Customs and Excise) v. Mattel Canada Inc., [2001] 2 S.C.R. 100; 270 N.R. 153; 199 D.L.R.(4th) 598, refd to. [paras. 45, 99].

Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27; 221 N.R. 241; 106 O.A.C. 1; 154 D.L.R.(4th) 193, refd to. [paras. 46, 90].

Bell Express Vu Limited Partnership v. Rex et al. (2002), 287 N.R. 248; 166 B.C.A.C. 1; 271 W.A.C. 1; 212 D.L.R.(4th) 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [paras. 46, 92].

Harvard College v. Commissioner of Patents (2002), 296 N.R. 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 46].

R. v. Morgentaler, [1993] 3 S.C.R. 463; 157 N.R. 97; 125 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 349 A.P.R. 81, refd to. [para. 65].

R. v. Heywood (R.L.), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 761; 174 N.R. 81; 50 B.C.A.C. 161; 82 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 66].

Ontario Teachers' Federation et al. v. Ontario (Attorney General) (1998), 53 O.T.C. 69; 39 O.R.(3d) 140 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 73].

Grey v. Pearson (1857), 29 L.T.O.S. 67 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 76].

Estabrooks Pontiac Buick Ltd., Re; New Brunswick v. Estabrooks Pontiac Buick Ltd., Estabrooks and Wolfe (1982), 44 N.B.R.(2d) 201; 116 A.P.R. 201; 144 D.L.R.(3d) 21 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 76].

Minister of National Revenue v. Alberta (Treasury Branches) et al., [1996] 1 S.C.R. 963; 196 N.R. 105; 184 A.R. 1; 122 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 95].

Friesen v. Minister of National Revenue, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 103; 186 N.R. 243, refd to. [para. 100].

Statutes Noticed:

Gasoline and Diesel Oil Tax Act Regula­tions, sect. 1(1)(mc), sect. 12(1)(k)(iii), sect. 14(d), sect. 21(1), sect. 34 [para. 15].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Arnold, Brian J., Statutory Interpretation: Some Thoughts on Plain Meaning in Report of Proceedings of the Fiftieth Tax Conference (1999), generally [para. 100].

Driedger, Elmer A., Construction of Stat­utes (2nd Ed. 1983), generally [para. 49].

Driedger, Elmer A., Construction of Stat­utes (3rd Ed. 1994), generally [para. 17]; pp. 58 [para. 18]; 64 et seq. [para. 76]; 131 [paras. 47, 93].

Hogg, P.W., Constitutional Law of Canada (3rd Ed. 1992) (Looseleaf Supp.), vol. 1, pp. 14, 15 [para. 60].

Nova Scotia, House of Assembly, Debates (April 30, 1982), pp. 2106, 2117, 2118 [para. 20].

Sullivan, Ruth, Statutory Interpretation (1997), pp. 50 [para. 48]; 149 to 151 [para. 75]; 199 et seq. [para. 60]; 208 [para. 58].

Spencer-Bower and Turner, Doctrine of Res Judicata (2nd Ed.), generally [para. 13]; para. 63 [para. 40].

Counsel:

Bruce S. Russell, for the appellant;

Duncan R. Beveridge, Q.C., for the re­spondent.

This appeal was heard on October 10, 2002, by Glube, C.J.N.S., Chipman and Bateman, JJ.A., of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered on January 22, 2003, when the following opinions were filed:

Glube, C.J.N.S (Chipman, J.A., con­curring) - see paragraphs 1 to 80;

Bateman, J.A. - see paragraphs 81 to 107.