Vancouver Regional FreeNet Association v. Minister of National Revenue, (1996) 199 N.R. 223 (FCA)

• Judge: Pratte, Hugessen and Décary, JJ.A.
• Court: Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
• Case Date: July 08, 1996
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1996), 199 N.R. 223 (FCA)

Vancouver Regional FreeNet v. MNR (1996), 199 N.R. 223 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Vancouver Regional FreeNet Association (appellant) v. Minister of National Revenue (respondent)

(A-413-94)

Indexed As: Vancouver Regional FreeNet Association v. Minister of National Revenue

Federal Court of Appeal

Pratte, Hugessen and Décary, JJ.A.

July 8, 1996.

Summary:

The Vancouver Regional FreeNet As­sociation was a nonprofit organization pro­viding free public access to the "information highway", including the Internet. The As­sociation's application under s. 248(1) of the Income Tax Act for charitable status was denied by the Minister. The Association appealed under s. 172(3).

The Federal Court of Appeal, Décary, J.A., dissenting, allowed the appeal. The As­soci­ation was a charitable organization for the purposes of the Act. The free exchange of in­formation was recognized as a public good and within the spirit and intendment of the preamble to the Statute of Elizabeth (Chari­table Uses Act (1601)). The Associ­ation's purpose in providing access was one of general public utility.

Income Tax - Topic 7533

Exemptions - Particular exemptions - Charitable organizations - The Vancouver Regional FreeNet Association was a nonprofit organization providing free pub­lic access to the "information highway", including the Internet - The Association's application under s. 248(1) of the Income Tax Act for charitable status was denied by the Minister - The Association appealed under s. 172(3) - The Federal Court of Appeal allowed the appeal - The Association was a charitable organization for the purposes of the Act - The free exchange of information was recognized as a public good and within the spirit and intendment of the preamble to the Statute of Elizabeth (Charitable Uses Act (1601)) - The Association's purpose in providing access was one of general public utility.

Cases Noticed:

Income Tax Special Purposes Commis­sioners v. Pemsel, [1891] A.C. 531, refd to. [para. 4].

Native Communications Society of British Columbia v. Minister of National Reve­nue, [1986] 3 F.C. 471; 67 N.R. 146; 86 D.T.C. 6353 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

Towle Estate v. Minister of National Revenue, [1967] S.C.R. 133, refd to. [para. 28].

Morice v. Bishop of Durham (1804), 9 Ves. 399, refd to. [para. 30].

Barralet v. Attorney General, [1980] 3 All E.R. 918, refd to. [para. 30].

Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England and Wales v. Attorney General, [1972] Ch. 73 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].

Scottish Burial Reform and Cremation Society Ltd. v. Glasgow Corp., [1968] A.C. 138 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 31].

Everywoman's Health Centre Society v. Minister of National Revenue, [1992] 2 F.C. 52; 136 N.R. 380 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

Positive Action Against Pornography v. Minister of National Revenue, [1988] 2 F.C. 340; 83 N.R. 214 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

Vancouver Society of Immigrant and Visible Minority Women v. Minister of National Revenue (1996), 195 N.R. 235 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

Briarpatch Inc. v. Minister of National Revenue (1996), 197 N.R. 229 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

Strakosch, Re; Temperley v. Attorney General, [1949] Ch. 529 (Ch. D.), refd to. [para. 34].

Macduff, Re, [1896] 2 Ch. 451 (Ch. D.), refd to. [para. 34].

Attorney General v. National Provincial Bank, [1924] A.C. 262 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 34].

Williams' Trustees v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, [1947] A.C. 447 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 34].

Sowcroft, Re; Ormrod v. Wilkinson, [1898] 2 Ch. 638 (Ch. D.), refd to. [para. 37].

Statutes Noticed:

Charitable Uses Act (1601), 43 Eliz. 1, c. 4, generally [para. 3].

Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1, sect. 149.1(1)(b) [para. 27]; sect. 248(1) [para. 26].

Society Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c. 390, sect. 2, sect. 3, sect. 4, sect. 5 [para. 9]

Authors and Works Noticed:

Canadian Radio-Television and Tele-communications Commission, Competi-tion and Culture on Canada's Infor­mation Highway: Managing the Realities (1995), pp. 43 to 44 [para. 40].

Gilster, Paul, The New Internet Navigator, generally [para. 8].

Tudor on Charities (7th Ed. 1984), pp. 90 to 91 [para. 5].

Tudor on Charities (8th Ed. 1995), p. 86 [para. 30].

Zwiebel, Ellen, A Truly Canadian Defi­nition of Charity and a Lesson in Drafting Charitable Purposes, The Philanthropist (1987), vol. VII, No. 1, p. 4 [para. 42].

Counsel:

James R. Aldridge and Marcus Bartley, for the appellant;

Roger Leclaire, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Rosenbloom & Alridge, Vancouver, B.C., for the appellant;

George Thomson, Deputy Attorney Gen­eral of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on June 10, 1996, at Vancouver, B.C., before Pratte, Hugessen and Décary, JJ.A., of the Federal Court of Appeal.

On July 8, 1996, the judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered and the fol­lowing opinions were filed:

Hugessen, J.A. (Pratte, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 21;

Décary, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 22 to 45.