Whitehorse (City) v. Canada
The Tax Court correctly held that the City was not entitled to a rebate under subsection 259(4) and section 174 of the Excise Tax Act in respect of the Yukon Bonus Travel Allowance; there was no error of law or fact warranting appellate intervention.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2013 FCA 144
- Parties
- Appellant: The City of Whitehorse; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 3 June 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal From Tax Court of Canada Excise Tax Act Rebate Dispute / Judgment on Appeal (dismissed)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- GST Rebate, Excise Tax Act S.259(4), Excise Tax Act S.174, Yukon Bonus Travel Allowance, Statutory Interpretation
- 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
The City of Whitehorse
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Tax Court of Canada Excise Tax Act Rebate Dispute / Judgment on Appeal (dismissed)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the City is entitled to a rebate under subsection 259(4) and section 174 of the Excise Tax Act in respect of the Yukon Bonus Travel Allowance
- 2 Whether the Tax Court erred in law or in fact in denying the rebate
Ratio Decidendi
The Tax Court correctly held that the City was not entitled to a rebate under subsection 259(4) and section 174 of the Excise Tax Act in respect of the Yukon Bonus Travel Allowance; there was no error of law or fact warranting appellate intervention.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Whitehorse (City) v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2013-06-03 Neutral citation 2013 FCA 144 File numbers A-388-12 Decision Content Date: 20130603 Docket: A-388-12 Citation: 2013 FCA 144 CORAM: SHARLOW J.A. WEBB J.A. NEAR J.A. BETWEEN: THE CITY OF WHITEHORSE Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on June 3, 2013. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on June 3, 2013. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A. Date: 20130603 Docket: A-388-12 Citation: 2013 FCA 144 CORAM: SHARLOW J.A. WEBB J.A. NEAR J.A. BETWEEN: THE CITY OF WHITEHORSE Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on June 3, 2013) SHARLOW J.A. [1] The City of Whitehorse is appealing the judgment of Justice Sheridan (2012 TCC 298) in which she held that the City is not entitled to a rebate pursuant to subsection 259(4) and section 174 of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. E-15, in respect of the Yukon Bonus Travel Allowance. We have not been persuaded that Justice Sheridan erred in law or in fact in deciding as she did. On the contrary, we agree with her decision, substantially for the reasons she gave. This appeal will be dismissed with costs. “K. Sharlow” J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-388-12 (APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE TAX COURT OF CANADA (THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE SHERIDAN) DATED AUGUST 16, 2012, DOCKET NO. 2010-383(GST)G) STYLE OF CAUSE: The City of Whitehorse v. Her Majesty The Queen PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia DATE OF HEARING: June 3, 2013 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: Sharlow, Webb, Near JJ.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: SHARLOW, J.A. DATED: June 3, 2013 APPEARANCES: Kimberley L. D. Cook FOR THE APPELLANT Victor Caux Selena Sit FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Thorsteinssons LLP Vancouver, British Columbia FOR THE APPELLANT William F. Pentney Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT