The Canadian Northern Railway Co. v. The King

The Canadian Northern Railway Co. v. The King

The court held that "any statute" in the Alberta exemption includes Dominion statutes (so federal guarantees exempt affected line portions until the 1918 amendment took effect); claims for statutory penalties and double taxation are limited by the cited limitation statutes to penalties accruing within two years of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
(1922) 64 SCR 264
Parties
Defendant Appellant: The Canadian Northern Railway Co.; Defendant Appellant: The Canadian National Railways Co.; Plaintiff Respondent: His Majesty the King; Plaintiff Respondent: Provincial Treasurer of Alberta
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 June 1922
Procedural Posture
Taxation Appeal / On Appeal From the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta to the Supreme Court of Canada
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; judgment of the Appellate Division varied.
Legal Topics
Meaning of "any Statute", Tax Exemption for Subsidized Railways, Statutory Penalties, Statutes of Limitation, Judicial Relief From Penalties
Source Language
english
Tax Law Statutory Interpretation Public Law Limitations Meaning of "any Statute" Tax Exemption for Subsidized Railways Statutory Penalties Statutes of Limitation +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Canadian Northern Railway Co.

Defendant Appellant

The Canadian National Railways Co.

Defendant Appellant

His Majesty the King

Plaintiff Respondent

Provincial Treasurer of Alberta

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Taxation Appeal / On Appeal From the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta to the Supreme Court of Canada

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the phrase "any statute" in the Alberta Revenue Act includes Dominion (federal) statutes
  2. 2 Whether statutory limitation provisions (31 Eliz. c.5 s.5 and 3 & 4 Wm. IV c.42 s.3) restrict recovery of penalties and double taxation to two years
  3. 3 Whether the provincial Supreme Court Act empowers the court to relieve against statutory penalties imposed by a taxing statute

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that "any statute" in the Alberta exemption includes Dominion statutes (so federal guarantees exempt affected line portions until the 1918 amendment took effect); claims for statutory penalties and double taxation are limited by the cited limitation statutes to penalties accruing within two years of commencement of the action; and the provincial court's general power to relieve against forfeitures does not extend to statutory penalties imposed by a taxing enactment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; judgment of the Appellate Division varied.

Orders

  • Judgment below varied to limit recoverable penalties and double tax to those accruing within two years prior to commencement of action
  • Respondents entitled to recover specified taxes for 1918 and 1919 and for the non‑exempt portion of the line for earlier years as decreed by court