The King v. Krakowec et al.

The King v. Krakowec et al.

A vehicle that has been or is being used for the purpose of removing spirits unlawfully manufactured or imported is forfeited to the Crown under Excise Act s.181 even where the legal owner had no notice or knowledge of the illegal use; s.124 does not grant the court discretion to avoid such statutory forfeiture and hardship relief lies with the executive remission powers.

Citation
[1932] SCR 134
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: His Majesty The King (on the information of the Attorney-General of Canada); Respondent/defendant: Max Krakowec; Respondent/defendant: Dahlberg and Eklund; Respondent/defendant: Continental Guaranty Corporation of Canada, Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 December 1931
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Exchequer Court; Forfeiture Under the Excise Act / Final Judgment on Appeal (supreme Court of Canada)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the Exchequer Court reversed; vehicle declared forfeited to the Crown.
Legal Topics
Forfeiture, Conditional Sale, Statutory Interpretation, Excise Act S.181, Proceedings in Rem, Penalties, Judicial Discretion Under S.124
Source Language
English
Taxation Criminal Law Revenue Law Forfeiture Conditional Sale Statutory Interpretation Excise Act S.181 Proceedings in Rem +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

His Majesty The King (on the information of the Attorney-General of Canada)

Appellant/plaintiff

Max Krakowec

Respondent/defendant

Dahlberg and Eklund

Respondent/defendant

Continental Guaranty Corporation of Canada, Limited

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Exchequer Court; Forfeiture Under the Excise Act / Final Judgment on Appeal (supreme Court of Canada)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a vehicle used to remove unlawfully manufactured spirits is forfeitable under Excise Act s.181 notwithstanding that the legal owner had no notice or knowledge of the illegal use
  2. 2 Whether the court has discretion under s.124 of the Excise Act to avoid forfeiture where an innocent owner claims interest
  3. 3 Whether the phrase 'have been or are being used for the purpose of removing' applies to vehicles held under conditional sale agreements

Ratio Decidendi

A vehicle that has been or is being used for the purpose of removing spirits unlawfully manufactured or imported is forfeited to the Crown under Excise Act s.181 even where the legal owner had no notice or knowledge of the illegal use; s.124 does not grant the court discretion to avoid such statutory forfeiture and hardship relief lies with the executive remission powers.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the Exchequer Court reversed; vehicle declared forfeited to the Crown.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs
  • Judgment entered granting the conclusions in the information of the Attorney-General of Canada and declaring the vehicle forfeited to His Majesty, with costs here and in the Exchequer Court