Décisions de la Cour fédérale

Informations sur la décision

Contenu de la décision

 

 

\

 
.-

Jr

 
''

coer a(  <Ct•nd  of  QLHmoa

'--:

O::rial ,IlihisiL1lt


 

 

 

editnt Ctl'  prcmiet-e iustanre oe

la CCnur Hl'tfralc on <L<umon

 

 

 

Date: 19980731

 

Docket: T-1361-94


 

 

 

 

BETWEEN:

 

THERM-O-COMFORT CO. LTO.,

 


fEDERAl COURT OF CRNAIIA CQUii fEDERRLE  OU CRNftD

p

F                                                        R                                    -and -

1 L       .: ,t   31 1998             g

l                                                    u

0                                                       I

D. FL.lMMING              r      HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN.

ri.EGIST$1Y ?'t"lCE!'l FQ'CTIONto!AlRE 0U OREl"fli.

OTTAWA, ONTARiO   \


Plaintiff,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Respondent.


 

 

 

 

REASONS FOR ORDER

 

 

 

 

TREMBLAY-LAMER J.:

 

 

 

[1)        This  is an appeal  pursuant to  section 81.24 of the  Excise Tax  Act1 ("Act")  from a decision of the  Canadian International Trade  Tribunal ("CITT").

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R.S.C. 1985, c.  E-15.


 

 

[2]        By two notices of  assessment dated  January 24,  1989 (nos.  6841

 

 

and  6842). the  Minister of National Revenue  assessed  the  Plaintiff for  unpaid tax  under  the Act  with respect to  the  sales of  cellulose insulation and  a product called  Fibramulch.  The Plaintiff objected and as a result, the

Minister varied notice of  assessment no. 6841, but  confirmed no. 6842. The Plaintiff appealed the  Minister's decision to the  CITT and the  Tribunal

.  dismissed the  appeal in part.

 

 

 

 

[3]        Two  issues  are before this  Court: first, whether Fibramulch qualifies for  exemption from  tax  as a fertilizer, pest  control product or peat  moss

within the  meaning of Part IV of  Schedule Ill of the Act;  and second,

 

 

whether the  property in cellulose insulation passed  to  the  purchasers after

 

 

July  1, 1985, thereby rendering the  goods  subject to tax.

 

 

 

 

1.        Whether Fibramulch qualifies for  exemption from  tax  as a fertilizer, pest  control product or peat  moss  within the  meaning of Part IV of Schedule Ill of  the  Act.

 

 

 

[4]        Fibramulch is a product made  by grinding down newsprint and  other types of paper  and adding green  dye.   Its  purpose is to  act  as a medium for growing grass.   Once  it is sold, it is combined with grass  seed and a wetting agent, and placed in lieu of sod on the sides  of hills, slopes, stream embankments, highway ditches and other  difficult areas  where seed  and


i

ol

Page: 3

 

 

 

fertilizer  cannot  be incorporated into the soil with  conventional farming equipment.

 

 

 

[51        Subsection 51 ( 1) of the Act  exempts  from  taxation  under section 50 all goods  sold or imported which  are mentioned  in Schedule Ill of the Act. The Plaintiff  contends  that  Fibramulch  is exempt  because it is a fertilizer, a pest control product and a peat moss within the meaning of section·s 9, 18, and 19 of Part IV of Schedule Ill.

 

 

 

[6]        The relevant statutory provisions are as follows:

 

 

 


50.  (1) There shall be imposed, levied  and collected  a consumption or sales tax at the rate prescribed in subsection ( 1.1)  on the sale price  or on the volume  sold of all goods

 

 

(a) produced or manufactured in Canada...

 

51. (1) The tax  imposed  by section  50 does not  apply to the  sale or importation of the goods  mentioned in Schedule Ill, other than those  goods mentioned in Part XIII of that Schedulethat are sold to or imported by persons exempt  from consumption  or sales tax under  subsection 54(2).

 

 

 

Schedule Ill

Part IV

Farm and Forest

 

9. Fertilizers  and materials for use exclusively  in the  manufacture thereof.

 

18. Peat moss  when used for agricultural purposes, including poultry litter.


50.  (1) Est imposee,  prelevee  et perc;ue une taxe de consommation au de vente au taux specifie  au paragraphe  (1.1)  sur le prix  de vente ou sur Ia quantite vendue  de toutes merchandises :

 

a) produites au fabriquees  au Canada  ...

 

 

51. (1) La taxe imposee  par !'article 50 ne s'applique  pas a Ia vente ou a !'importation des merchandises mentionnees  a l'annexe Ill, excepte les marchandises  mentionnees a

Ia partie  XIII de cette  annexe qui sont vendues au importees par des personnes exemptees  du paiement  de Ia taxe de consommation au de vente en application du paragraphe  54(2).

 

Annexe Ill

Partie IV

Produits  de Ia ferme et de Ia foret

 

9. Engrais et mati8res davant  servir exclusivement  a leur fabrication.

 

18. Tourbe utilisee  aux fins agricoles, y compris  Ia litiere  pour volaille.


 

 


19. Preparations, chemicals  or poisons  for pest  control purposes  in agriculture or horticulture, and materials  used in the manufacture thereof.


19. Preparations, produits chimiques  au poisons  pour Ia lutte contre  les parasites dans I'agriculture au !'horticulture, de meme que les mati6res devant servir

exclusivement a leur fabrication.


 

 

 

[7]     In the  proceeding below, the  Plaintiff's contentions were  rejected. Despite the  fact  that  Fibramulch contains three  of the essential nutrients commonly found in fertilizers {i.e. nitrogen, potassium and phosphorous), they  are found in quantities so small that  it limits the  quantity of nutrients

released.  The manner in  which Fibramulch is applied  also limits their  release. Moreover, the  CITT noted that  the  product was  not  intended to provide nutrition to  plants, but  was  to be used  as a medium for growing grass.

 

 

 

[8]      Fibramulch also did  not  qualify as a pest  control product because it was  not  created for  that  purpose.  The fact  that  it happens to hide  seeds from birds  is not  sufficient to  qualify it as a preparation for  pest  control.

 

 

 

[9]       Finally, the  CITT did  not  consider Fibramulch to be peat  moss. Shredded newsprint dyed  green  does  not  fit the  definition of peat  moss.


 

 

 

a) Does Fibramulch qualify as a fertilizer?

 

 

 

 

[10]      There  is no definition of the  word "fertilizer" in the  Act. In the absence of  a definition, the  principles of  statutory interpretation allow us to  resort to related legislation to interpret the  term.  There  is a presumption that when more  than  one  statute is enacted on the  same  subject, they  operate together:

Where two or more statutes are enacted  by a legislature  on the same subject, they  are presumed  to operate together to create

a single regulatory regime.   In such  cases, the provisions of each statute must  be read in the context of the others  and consideration must  be given to their  role in the overall  scheme.2

 

 

 

[11]     The  Fertilizers Acf   defines fertilizer  as:

 

 

 

 


"fertilizer" means  any substance  or mixture of substances, containing  nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium or other plant  food, manufactured, sold or represented  for use as a plant  nutrient;


uengrais» Substance  ou melange  de substances, contenant de I'azote,  du phosphore, du potassium ainsi que tout autre element  nutritif des plantes, fabrique

ou vendu  a ce titre  ou represents comme

tel.


 

 

 

 

 

[12]     The  evidence indicates that  Fibramulch contains small  quantities of

 

·  three essential nutrients found in fertilizers, i.e.  nitrogen (0.17%). potassium

 

 

(0.5%} and phosphorous (0.5%).

 

 

 

 

2                       Ruth Sullivan,  Driedger on  the  Construction of Statutes, 3rd  ed. (Toronto: Butterworths, 1994) at 286.

 

3                      R.S.C. c. F-9, s. 1.


 

 

 

[13]     Further, due to the  loading (quantity used per acre}  and lack  of dissipation of the  nitrogen content into  the  air as compared to conventional fertilizers, the  nitrogen available to  the  new  seedlings is greater  after  7 to  10 days  with Fibramulch then  it would be using  unincorporated conventional urea fertilizers.

 

 

 

[141     Fibramulch is used  to promote germination of grass  seed in areas which are otherwise difficult to  seed.

 

 

 

[15]   The Plaintiff maintains that the  definition does not  indicate a minimum amount.  According to Mr.  Flood,  a witness for the  Plaintiff, notwithstanding the  low concentrations, it provides sufficient nutrients for  a healthy crop.

 

 

 

[16]    On the  other  hand, the  Defendant's witness, Mr.  Radey,  a fertilizer evaluator pursuant to the  Fertilizers· Act, was  of the  opinion that  he  would never  use Fibramulch because of the  low  concentration of nutrients.  Almost all vegetable matter contain those  nutrients; it does not  mean that  they qualify as a fertilizer.

 

 

 

[17]     Further, common fertilizers to  be effective are incorporated into the soil to allow  microbes present in the  soil to interact with the  fertilizers


 

 

allowing the  release of plant  nutrients.  Fibramulch  is applied to the surface of the soil.   Therefore, microbial interaction cannot  occur.

 

 

 

[18]      I give great  weight to Mr.  Radey's  testimony, more specifically his expertise  on the meaning  of what  is a fertilizer. I agree with  him, and it is common  sense, that  it is not because  a product contains  some residual nutrient that  it can qualify  as fertilizer.  As pointed  out by Mr.  Radey, the purpose  of a fertilizer  is to provide  nutrition. The evidence  indicates that common  fertilizers contain  much  more nutrients.  If no minimum amount  is required, then  any plant  material, straw, sawdust, would  be fertilizers.

 

 

 

[19]      Secondly, the definition requires  that  the product be manufactured sold or represented  as a fertilizer.  Mr. Radey testified:

A product manufactured, sold or represented as a fertilizer

would  be a product whose  use is to provide  nutrients to a crop, the essential plant nutrients.  Its representation, it would be properly  labelled  as a fertilizer. It would be labelled  according

to the labelling  requirements identified in the Act  and

regulations.4

 

 

 

 

[20]      The Fertilizers Regu/ations5  require the following labelling requirements:

 

 

 

 

4                      Transcript, val.  2 at 240.

 

5                       C.R.C., c. 666.


 

 

 


16. (1) Subject  to subsections (2), (4) and (5). every package  containing a fertilizer shall have a label affixed to it on which shall be printed

 

(a) the name and address of the manufacturer of the fertilizer  or of the registrant or, in the  case of a fertilizer  that is not registered under these Regulations, the name and address of the person who caused the  fertilizer  to be packaged;

 

(b) the brand  of the fertilizer, if  any; (c) the name of the fertilizer;

(d) the registration number  of the  fertilizer, where  applicable;

 

(e) the guaranteed analysis  prescribed  in section  15;

 

(f) in the case of a fertilizer-pesticide, a product represented  to contain  lesser plant nutrients  other than calcium,  magnesium  or sulphur, a specialty  fertilizer  or a product represented for foliar  feeding, the directions for use;

 

(g) where  the fertilizer  is a

fertilizer-pesticide, all statements required by the Compendium of Fertilizer-Use Pesticides;

 

(h) the weight of the fertilizer; and

 

(i) where  the fertilizer  is other than a specialty fertilizer  and has intentionally incorporated  in it or is represented  to contain boron, copper,  manganese, molybdenum  or zinc or, in the opinion of the Minister, has a natural high content  of one or more of these lesser plant nutrients, the following cautionary statement: "CAUTION: This fertilizer  contains  (specify

name of lesser plant  nutrient)  and should be

used only  as recommended. It may prove harmful when misused."


16.  (1)  Sous reserve  des paragraphes  (2). (4) et (5). chaque emballage  contenant un engrais  doit porter une etiquette sur laquelle seront imprimes les renseignements

suivants  :

 

a) le nom et l'adresse  du fabricant de l'engrais  au de l'inscrit  au, dans le cas d'un engrais qui n'est pas enregist.re  en vertu  du present  reglement, le nom et l'adresse  de Ia personne  qui a fait emballer  l'engrais;

 

b) Ia marque de l'engrais, le cas echeant;

 

c) le nom de l'engrais;

 

d) le numero  d'enregistrement de l'engrais, le cas echeant;

 

e) I'analyse garantie, prescrite            I'article  15;

 

f) dans le cas d'un  engrais-antiparasitaire, d'un produit annonce comme renfermant des principes nutritifs  secondaires autres que le calcium,  le magnesium  ou le soufre, d'un  engrais special ou d'un  produit annonce comme etant  destine  a Ia nutrition foliaire, le mode d'emploi;

 

g) dans le cas d'un  engrais-antiparasitaire,

les mentions  exigees par le Recueil des

pesticides  a usage dans les engrais;

 

h) le poids  de l'engrais; et

 

iJ   lorsque l'engrais  est un engrais autre qu'un engrais special, lorsqu'il a ete intentionnellement additionne  de bore, de cuivre, de manganese,  de molybdene  ou de zinc ou est cBnse en contenir  ou lorsque, de I' avis du ministre, il accuse une haute

teneur naturelle de l'un  ou plusieurs de ces principes nutritifs secondaires,  Ia

declaration  suivante relative aux precautions  a prendre :

« AVERTISSEMENT : Cet engrais  renferme (indiquer  le nom du principe  nutritif secondaire)  et ne doit etre employe  que de Ia mani8re recommandee.  II peut  etre nocif

s'il est. employe mal a propos.  »


 

 

[211    The evidence shows that  all fertilizers are subject to these  label requirements.  The Fibramulch labels  do  not  meet  these  requirements. Fibramulch is exempt because it is not  manufactured and sold  or represented as a fertilizer.  Mr.  Radey  explains as follows:

A.             If the product is sold as a fibre  mulch  the product would be exempt  from the Act and Regulations.  If it is represented to provide  nutrients and it is being sold  as a source  of plant nutrients, then it would  be subject  to the Act and Regulations.

 

Q.            If someone  is bringing  a product to the Department and says "I want  to represent  this  as a fertilizer", is there any way that they  go about proving to you that  it is a fertilizer?

 

A.             Common fertilizers, farm fertilizers, and specialty fertilizers that  are used as a source  of plant  nutrients, nitrogen, phosphorous  and potassium,  are exempt  from registration.

 

Being exempt  from registration does not mean that  they are not subject  to the labelling  requirements or the contents of the Regulations.  They are still subject to labelling,  standards, et

cetera, identified in the Regulations. 6

 

 

 

 

!221     Thus,  it does  not  meet  the  second part  of the  definition.

 

 

 

 

b)  Does Fibramulch qualify as a pest control product?

 

 

 

 

[23)     As previously indicated, section 19  of  Part IV of  Schedule Ill of  the Act  provides an exemption for  "preparations, chemicals or poisons for  pest control purposes in agriculture or horticulture".

 

 

 

 

 

6                       Transcript, val.  2 at 249-50.


 

 

 

[24]    It is undisputed that  Fibramulch is not  a chemical or a poison.  The issue  is whether it qualifies as a preparation for  pest  control purposes.

 

 

 

[25]    The Plaintiff contends it is because it conceals the  grass  seeds  from the birds  and prevents the  growth of  weeds. According to the  testimony of Mr.  Bill Aimers, president of "The  Grass  Company" which uses  the  product, Fibramulch when applied  forms  a thin carpet on the  ground which effectively hides the grass  seeds  from the birds  and stops  weeds from  growing.7

 

 

 

[26]     In my  opinion, it is not  a pest  control product for  it was  never intended to be used  for  that  purpose.  Rather, it is used  on slopes,  hills  etc. to prevent erosion and ensure  that  the  grass  can take  and become well established.  The fact  that  it incidentally hides  or camouflages seed  from birds  is not  sufficient for  it to qualify as a pest  control preparation.  If  it were, then  any  ground cover  could  potentially meet  the  requirements of

section 19.   This  cannot be so.   As counsel for the  Respondent asked, if you put  a tarp  over  the  seeds,  would it qualify as a pest  control product?

Probably not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7                      Transcript, vol. 1 at 14-15, 25-26.


 

 

[27)      Moreover, section  19 requires  that  the preparation  be used in agriculture or horticulture.  There is no evidence  that Fibramulch  is used in agriculture.  In fact, Mr. Matthie, the National Co-ordinator for  Crop

Protection at the Canadian Horticultural Council and an expert  in horticulture, testified that  he had never  encountered the product in farming  circles  and

that  it did not have an application for general farm purposes. 8

 

 

 

 

[281    Horticulture is defined  as the cultivation of gardens including growing of flowers, fruit  and vegetables.    Growing grass on the sides of hills  and on the road side is certainly not included  in horticulture.

 

 

 

[29)      Further, it cannot  be a pest control product because birds  are not pests.   In Weed-Master (Western) Ltd.  v. Minister of National Revenue for Customs and Excise,9  the CITT held that  the provision distinguished between horticultural pests and occasional nuisances.  I fully  agree with  the view  of the Tribunal:

It is the Board's  view  that  in determining what  is a pest in the context of paragraph 20, as well as the nature  and function of the goods in issue, it must differentiate between a horticultural pest and an occasional  nuisance.   If one were to include under the term pest all forms  of animal or indeed  human life that

either by disposition  or habit result in obnoxious  behaviour,  the

list  would  be long indeed.   On the other  hand, it can be said of

the goods in issue that it modifies the normal behaviour  of cats

 

 

 

8                       Transcript, vol.  2 at 307,  317.

 

9                       (1974). 6 T.B.R. 226  (CITT).


 

 

and dogs to make them  conform to the requirements of urban and suburban life.   However, it does not follow from this  that the presence  of a pattern of behaviour  which is incidental to the animal's  other  activities would  warrant the classification of

these animals  as pests either under  an interpretation of the English term  "pest  control" or the French term  Ia lutte contre les paras[tes.10

 

 

 

[30]     In that  case, dogs  and cats  were  not  held  to be pests  within the meaning of  section 19.   The  same  applies  in the  case at bar.   Although they can occasionally be nuisances in the context of  agriculture, birds  are not pests within the  meaning of section 19.

 

 

 

c)  Does Fibramulch qualify as peat moss?

 

 

 

 

[31]     The Oxford  English Dictionary11 defines "peat  moss" as "[v]egetable matter decomposed by  water  and partially carbonised by chemical changes often forming bogs  or 'mosses' of large  extent"Y

 

 

 

[321    In his testimony, Mr.  Radey  defined the  term  as "partially decomposed vegetable matter... used  as a soil amendment to improve the  water retention capabilities of  the  soil".13

 

 

10                    Ibid.  at 229-230.

,

Vol.  XI, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon  Press, 1989).

 

12                    Ibid.  at 405.

 

13       Transcript, vol.  2 at 275.


 

 

 

[33]      Fibramulch meets neither  of these definitions.  First, it does not

 

contain  any vegetable  matter.  It is simply  shredded  newspapers dyed  green. Second, under  cross-examination, Mr. Radey disagreed  with  the proposition that  Fibramulch  and peat moss are interchangeable.  He explained  that Fibramulch is "a paper product which  performs differently in the soil than  the peat moss  would  do.... [l]t is slower  to break down.   It does not increase

the tilt  of the soil the same as peat moss  would".14   Therefore, I find that

 

 

Fibramulch does not qualify  as peat moss within the meaning  of section  1 8 of Part IV of Schedule Ill of the Act.

 

 

 

2.     ·    Whether  the property in cellulose  insulation passed to the purchasers after July  1, 1985, thereby  rendering the goods subject  to tax.

 

 

 

[34]      By virtue  of subparagraph 50(1}(a)(i)  of the Act,  a sales tax imposed on the price  of goods manufactured in Canada is only payable by the manufacturer at the time  when the goods are delivered  to the purchaser  or

when the property in the goods passes, whichever comes  first:

 

 

 

 


50. (1) There shall be imposed, levied  and collected a consumption or sales tax at the rate prescribed in subsection (1.1)  on the sale price  or on the volume  sold of all goods


50. (1)  Est imposee, prelevee et per  ue une taxe de consommation ou de vente au taux specifie  au paragraphe  (1.1)  sur le prix  de vente  ou sur Ia quantile vendue  de toutes marchandises  :


 

(a) produced or manufactured in Canada                           a) produites ou fabriquees  au Canada :

 

 

 

14                    Transcript, val. 2 at 349-350.


 

 

 


(i) payable, in any case other than a case mentioned in subparagraph Iii)  or (iii), by the producer

or manufacturer at the time when  the goods  are delivered  to the  purchaser or at the time  when the property in the  goods passes,  whichever  is the earlier.


lil payable, dans tout  cas autre que ceux mentionnes aux sous-alim\as  Iii) ou liiil. par le producteur ou

fabricant au moment ou les marchandises sont livnles  a

I'acheteur  au au moment  oU Ia propriete des marchandises est

transmise,  en choisissant

celle de ces dates qui est anterieure  a I'autre.


 

 

 

 

 

[35)      In the instant  case, the sales tax on insulation became effective July

 

1, 1985.  The evidence  shows  that  the delivery  of the bags of insulation in question to the customers took place  after that  date.15   The issue is whether the property in the  goods passed to the purchasers before  the insulation became  subject  to tax.16

 

 

 

[361     The transfer  of property of goods  which  are the subject  of a contract of sale is governed  in Ontario  by the Sale of Goods Act,17 and more

specifically by sections  17, 18 and 19:

 

 


1 7.  Where there is a contract for the sale of unascertained goods,  no property in the goods  is transferred to the buyer  until the goods  are ascertained.


17.   La propriBt8 d'objets  incertains  n'est transf8n3e a l'acheteur  que lorsqu'ils  sont

devenus  certains.


 

 

15                   Transcript, vol.  1 at 153.

 

16                    Approximately 20 invoices are in issue.   In the case of invoices nos.  15930  and

16268, the Tribunal  found  for the Plaintiff.  The Defendant  did not take  issue with these findings.

 

17                    R.S.O. 1990, c.  S-1.


 

 


18.(1) Where there is a contract for the sale of specific  or ascertained  goods, the property in them  is transferred to the buyer at such time  as the parties  to the contract intend it to be transferred.

 

(2) For the purpose  of ascertaining the intention of the parties, regard  shall be had to the terms  of the contract, the conduct of the  parties  and the circumstances of the case.

 

19.   Unless  a different intention appears, the following are rules for  ascertaining  the intention of the parties  as to the time at which the property in the goods  is to pass to the  buyer:

 

Rule 5.-

 

(i) Where  there is a contract for the sale of

unascertained or future goods  by description and goods  of that  description and in a deliverable  state are unconditionally appropriated to the

contract, either by the seller with  the  assent of the buyer, or by the buyer  with the assent of the seller, the property in the goods thereupon passes to the buyer, and such assent may

be expressed or implied  and may be given either before or after  the appropriation is made.


18.(1)  La propriete  d'objets determines au

certains· est transferee a I'acheteur  au

moment  aU les parties au contrat  ant

I'intention de Ia transferer.

 

 

(2) Pour determiner  !'intention des parties, il y a lieu de considerer  les stipulations du contrat, Ia conduite des parties  et Jes circonstances  de I'espBce.

 

 

19.   Sauf intention contraire, les regles suivantes  servant a determiner  !'intention des parties  quant  au moment  du transfert a

l'acheteur de Ia propriete  des objets:

 

 

Regie 5.-

 

(i) Lorsqu'il s'agit  d'un contrat de vente sur description d'objets ind9termines  ou futurs,  Ia propriete  des objets  est

transferee a l'acheteur  au

moment au des objets

livrables  de cette description sont  affectes sans condition  au contrat, soit par le vendeur  avec le

consentement de

l'acheteur, soit par l'acheteur avec le consentement  du vendeur. Ces consentements

peuvent  6tre exprBs au tacites  et peuvent etre donnas avant ou apres I'affectation.


 

 

 

 

[37]     In dealing  with  the  passing of property, the  Sale of Goods  Act

 

distinguishes between specific goods and  unascertained goods.  As defined

 

in subsection 1 ( 1),  specific goods are  goods which  are  "identified and  agreed upon  at  the  time  the  contract of sale  is made".                                               Unascertained goods are  not


 

 

defined, but  refer  to goods  which are not  specifically identified at the  time the contract is made.   They  are usually generic  goods  identified by description only, future goods  which have  not  already  been  manufactured or a portion of a specific whole not  yet  severed and identified.18

 

 

 

[381 ·   It is agreed  by  the  parties that  the  contract for the  sale of insulation bags  is one  for  the  sale of unascertained goods.

 

 

 

[391     Where  there  is a contract for  the  sale of  unascertained goods, section

 

 

17  of the  Sale of Goods  Act  stipulates that  no  property in the  goods  can pass to the  buyer  until some  act  is performed which ascertains which goods are those to  be delivered to  the  buyer.  Goods  are ascertained when they

become more  particularly identifiable after  the  contract is made.           Fridman describes ascertainment in the  following manner:

What is needed for ascertainment, said an English judge, is that the buyer  should  be able to say, "Those  are my goods".  This requirement  is satisfied if he can say, "All those are my

goods". 19

 

 

 

[40]    This  provision aside, the Sale of  Goods  Act  otherwise lets  the p;; rties determine the  specific moment at which they  want  the  transfer of  property

 

 

 

 

18                    G.H.L. Fridman, Sale of Goods in Canada,  4th ed. (Toronto: Carswell, 1995)  at

91.

 

19                    Ibid.  at 92.


 

 

of  specific or ascertained goods  to  occur.20   When  this  intention cannot be ascertained from  the  terms  of the  contract or the  circumstances of  the  case, section 19, rule  5 applies.   It stipulates that in the  case  of  a contract for  the sale of  unascertained or future goods  by  description, property in the  goods will pass  to the  buyer when goods  of that  description, in a deliverable state, are unconditionally appropriated to  the  contract either  by the  seller  with the

assent of the  buyer  or by the  buyer with the  assent  of  the  seller.   Such assent may  be expressed or implied, and may  be given either  before or  after the  appropriate is made.   In most  cases, the  act  of  ascertainment is simultaneous with the  act  of appropriation.21

 

 

 

[41)      In the  case  at bar, the  CITT found that it was  the  intention of  the parties to have the  property in the  insulation pass  when payment was received in full.  The invoice expressly provided so.   The Tribunal wrote:

On the question of intention, the Tribunal gave considerable weight  to the provision on the appellant's  invoices that provides  that property passes only after payment  is made.   Mr.  Wiley testified that this provision did not govern  the appellant's  dealings with its customers. However, the Tribunal  has difficulty relying solely  on the uncorroborated testimony of the witness regarding what was in the minds of the appellant's  customers.   In the absence of corroborating  testimony, the Tribunal  is of the

 

 

 

 

 

20        Supra note 17, s. 18.

 

21                      Supra note 18  at 92 n. 165.


 

 

 

view  that  it should  consider  at face value the

plain and unequivocal  wording  of the invoice.22

 

 

 

 

[42]     The Plaintiff objects to this  finding, arguing that  the  clause  was subsequent to  the  formation of  the  contract and cannot be relied  on as an expression of  the  parties' intention.  It argues  that rule  5 of section 19  is applicable and that  the  property passed  when the  goods  were  appropriated to the  contract which allegedly took  place  prior  to  July  1, 1985.

 

 

 

[431     The evidence shows that it was  the  Plaintiff's practice to put  the insulation bags  in trailers immediately after  they  were  manufactured.  A tally sheet  was  affixed to  the  trailer  indicating the  number of bags  loaded.  Once

a client placed an order, the  invoice number was  indicated on the  tally  sheet. Depending on the  number of  bags  ordered, the  contents of  a trailer  could either  be assigned entirely to  a client or to  more  than  one client.

 

 

 

[44]     In my  opinion, when  the  full content of  a trailer  was  assigned to one account, the  goods  were  ascertained because it is clear  that  they  were destined for  one customer.23    The invoice number was indicated on the  tally

 

 

 

 

22                    Tribunal's  Reasons for Decision  at 6.

 

23                    Pullman  Trai/mobi/e Canada Ltd.  v. Hamilton Transport Refrigeration Ltd. eta/.

(1979), 23  O.R. (2d)  553 (Ont. H.C.); Wait  & James v. Midland Bank  (1926),

31  Com  Cas 172.


 

 

 

sheet  affixed to the  trailer  thereby identifying the  goods  to the  contract. This  amounts to ascertainment.

 

 

 

[451     Property in those  goods  could therefore pass before July  1, 1985 and potentially the  goods  would not  be subject to  the  sales tax, unless  there was a contrary intention found in the  express terms of the  contract.

 

 

 

[46)      The invoices indicate that  "All materials and equipment remain the property of  Therm-O-Comfort Co. Ltd.  until paid  in full".  The Plaintiff argues that this  clause does  not  form part  of the  contract.  The contract was concluded when the  customer placed  his  order  and the  invoice was  only

seen by  the  customer upon  delivery.  Thus,  the  transfer of property provision in the  invoice cannot be incorporated into  the  contract.

 

 

 

[47)     There  is a long  line  of  authority which establishes that  a party cannot rely  on a condition which was  added  after  the  formation of the  contract.  In the  English case of  Dennant  v. Skinner and  Collom,24 Hallett J. wrote:

 

Now the document  in its terms contemplates that the ownership  of the  vehicle  has  not  passed to the  bidder,  but,  as  I have already said,  in my judgment it had  passed upon  the  fall of the hammer, and  if  subsequently the  bidder  executed the  document acknowledging that ownership of the  vehicle  would

 

 

 

 

 

24                    [19481 2 K.B. 164.


 

 

 

not pass to him, that  could not have any effect on what  had already taken place.25

 

 

 

 

 

[48]      The Ontario  Court  of Appeal endorsed  the same proposition in Trigg v.

 

Ml Movers  International Transport Services  Ltd. 26  when it stated:

 

 

 

Essentially,  a term cannot  be included in an agreement unless it was  contemplated at the time that the agreement  was concluded, or was added thereto  by a proper  variation  or modification.27

 

 

 

 

[49]      However, this is not the situation in the case at bar.   First, at the hearing  before  the CITT, it was recognized  by Mr. Bernard Wiley, President of Therm-O-Comfort, that  the invoice  constituted the contract between the parties  and that he was aware  of the presence  of the impugned  clause.28

This supports  the conclusion that the  wording of the contract establishes the date of the transfer  of ownership.

 

 

 

[50]      Second, no evidence  was adduced  by the Plaintiff  to contradict Mr. Wiley's admission.   It did not  adduce any evidence  from the buyer  as to

 

 

 

 

25                    Ibid.  at 172.

 

26                    (1991). 4 O.R. (3d)  562  (C.A.).

 

27                     Ibid. at 567-568.

 

28                    Transcript, vol.  1 at 160-161.


 

 

 

what were  the  terms of the  contract.  There  is no evidence to indicate that the  provision was  not  part  of the  agreement between the  parties.  Therefore, in the  absence of  such  evidence, I conclude that  it did  form  part  of the agreement.

 

 

 

[51]    The evidence establishes that  the invoices at issue  were  still outstanding July  1, 1985.29    Hence, the  goods  are subject to the  sales tax.

 

 

 

[52]    Where  the  contents of  a trailer  are the  subject of more  than one contract with more  than one customer, the  goods are only  ascertained on delivery.  As stated by Fridman:

 

... [l]f  there  were other  goods  on board  subject to contracts

with  other buyers,  the onloading  of such goods  will  result  in the ascertainment of the particular  buyer's goods  by a process  of exhaustion.  What is left  on the ship, as long  as it all pertains  to contracts with  the same buyer, will  be ascertained  for the purposes  of the section, and will  be the property of that

buyer.30

 

 

 

 

[53]    As I have  previously indicated, all deliveries took  place  after  July  1,

 

 

1985, thereby rendering the  goods  subject to  the  sales tax.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29                    Transcript, vol.  2 at 371.

 

30                     Supra  note  18 at 92.


 

 

 

[54)      For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OTTAWA, ONTARIO July  31, 1998.


FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION

 

NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD

 

 

 

 

 

COURT FILE NO.:                   T-1361-94

 

 

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                 THERM-O-COMFORT CO. LTD. v.

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

 

 

 

PLACE OF HEARING:           TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING:                                JUNE 23, 1998

REASONS FOR ORDER OF MADAME JUSTICE TREMBLAY-LAMER

 

DATED:                                      JULY 31, 1998

 

 

 

 

APPEARANCES:

 

 

 

TONY VAN KLINK                                                          FOR PLAINTIFF JEFFREY ANDERSON                                                                        FOR DEFENDANT

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

 

 


MCCARTHY TETRAULT LONDON, ONTARIO


FOR PLAINTIFF


 


MORRIS ROSENBERG

DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA


FOR DEFENDANT

 Vous allez être redirigé vers la version la plus récente de la loi, qui peut ne pas être la version considérée au moment où le jugement a été rendu.