Interpro Distributeurs de Viandes Inc. v. Canada (Border Services Agency)
The appeal was dismissed because the Court found no error of law in the Tribunal's decision: the appellant's complaints amounted to requests to reweigh factual findings and credibility assessments, which are matters of fact not reviewable on appeal under s.68(1) of the Customs Act; accordingly the Tribunal's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2024 FCA 91
- Parties
- Appellant: Interpro Distributeurs de Viandes Inc.; Respondent: President of the Canada Border Services Agency
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 8 May 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal From Canadian International Trade Tribunal Under Subsection 68(1) of the Customs Act / Hearing and Judgment at the Federal Court of Appeal (appeal Decision)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Tariff Classification of Imported Goods, Standard of Proof, Scope of Review on Appeal, Assessment and Weighing of Evidence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Interpro Distributeurs de Viandes Inc.
Appellant
President of the Canada Border Services Agency
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Canadian International Trade Tribunal Under Subsection 68(1) of the Customs Act / Hearing and Judgment at the Federal Court of Appeal (appeal Decision)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Tribunal applied a higher standard of proof than the balance of probabilities
- 2 Whether the Tribunal made findings of fact without regard to the evidence or improperly attributed the respondent witness's weaknesses to the appellant
- 3 Whether the Federal Court of Appeal may reweigh factual findings on appeal under s.68(1) of the Customs Act
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the Court found no error of law in the Tribunal's decision: the appellant's complaints amounted to requests to reweigh factual findings and credibility assessments, which are matters of fact not reviewable on appeal under s.68(1) of the Customs Act; accordingly the Tribunal's classification of the imported chicken as "young chicken" was upheld.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent in the lump sum amount of $3,000 (CAD).
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Interpro Distributeurs de Viandes Inc. v. Canada (Border Services Agency) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2024-05-08 Neutral citation 2024 FCA 91 File numbers A-215-23 Decision Content Date: 20240508 Docket: A-215-23 Citation: 2024 FCA 91 [ENGLISH TRANSLATION] CORAM: BOIVIN J.A. GLEASON J.A. HECKMAN J.A. BETWEEN: INTERPRO DISTRIBUTEURS DE VIANDES INC. Appellant and PRESIDENT OF THE CANADA BORDER SERVICES AGENCY Respondent Heard at Montréal, Québec, on May 8, 2024. Judgment delivered from the bench at Montréal, Québec, on May 8, 2024. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: BOIVIN J.A. Date: 20240508 Docket: A-215-23 Citation: 2024 FCA 91 CORAM: BOIVIN J.A. GLEASON J.A. HECKMAN J.A. BETWEEN: INTERPRO DISTRIBUTEURS DE VIANDES INC. Appellant and PRESIDENT OF THE CANADA BORDER SERVICES AGENCY Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on May 8, 2024.) BOIVIN J.A. [1] The appellant, a company that imports poultry products, is appealing a decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the Tribunal) rendered on June 7, 2023 (AP-2020-030). The appellant is challenging the Tribunal’s tariff classification of chicken thighs that it had declared as “spent fowl” (tariff item 0207.14.10) when they were imported. In its decision, the Tribunal, confirming the President of the Canada Border Services Agency’s decision, found that on a balance of probabilities, the cargo was actually “young chicken” (tariff item 0207.14.93), a classification subject to higher tariff treatment. [2] It is settled in the case law that under subsection 68(1) of the Customs Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (2nd Supp.), appeals from decisions of the Tribunal must be limited to questions of law (Canada (Attorney General) v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc., 2023 FCA 209; Atlantic Owl (PAS) Limited Partnership v. Canada (Border Services Agency), 2022 FCA 214; Canada (Border Services Agency) v. Danson Décor Inc., 2022 FCA 205). [3] The appellant alleges that the Tribunal erred in imposing on it a higher standard of proof than the balance of probabilities, by making findings of fact without regard to the evidence, and by attributing to the appellant the weaknesses of the testimony provided by the respondent’s witness. [4] Rather, the issues raised by the appellant demonstrate its dissatisfaction with the way the Tribunal assessed and weighed the evidence. The appellant is essentially asking us to intervene on questions of fact, whereas the questions in this matter must be limited to questions of law. [5] We did not find any error of law in the Tribunal’s decision. Consequently, the appeal will be dismissed, with costs in the lump sum amount of $3,000. “Richard Boivin” J.A. Certified true translation Melissa Paquette, Senior Jurilinguist FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-215-23 STYLE OF CAUSE: INTERPRO DISTRIBUTEURS DE VIANDES INC. v. PRESIDENT OF THE CANADA BORDER SERVICES AGENCY PLACE OF HEARING: MONTRÉAL, QuÉbec DATE OF HEARING: May 8, 2024 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: BOIVIN J.A. GLEASON J.A. HECKMAN J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: BOIVIN J.A. APPEARANCES: Christopher R. Mostovac For the appellant Patrick Visintini Luc Vaillancourt For the respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Starnino Mostovac Montréal, Québec For the appellant Shalene Curtis-Micallef Deputy Attorney General of Canada For the respondent