TransGas Ltd. v. Mid-Plains Contractors Ltd.
- Citation
- [1994] 3 SCR 753
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 3 November 1994
- Posture
- Appeal Constitutional Law (division of Powers) / Judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal; Appeal Dismissed
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 3 November 1994
- Posture
- Appeal Constitutional Law (division of Powers) / Judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal; Appeal Dismissed
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The provisions of s.224(1.2) and (1.3) of the Income Tax Act do not constitute an impermissible intrusion into provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights under s.92(13); the manner of obtaining monies under those provisions is intra vires Parliament and therefore valid.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; constitutional question answered in the negative.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Constitutional question answered: No
- Costs to the appellants as between solicitor and client payable out of and limited to the interest on the principal of the fund
02
Material facts
Parties
Non-Labour Lien Claimants
Appellants Counsel: Murray R. SawatskyHer Majesty The Queen in right of Canada as represented by the Minister of National Revenue - Taxation
Respondent Counsel: Edward R. Sojonky; Mark R. KindrachukTransGas Limited
RespondentSaskatchewan Workers' Compensation Board
RespondentP. E. Ben Industries Company Ltd.
RespondentA. M. Inspection Ltd.
RespondentCertified Rentals Ltd.
RespondentArrow Welding & Industrial Supplies Inc.
RespondentPermanent Concrete (Division of LaFarge Canada)
RespondentJapa Industries Ltd.
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Appeal Constitutional Law (division of Powers) / Judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal; Appeal Dismissed
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether s.224(1.2) and (1.3) of the Income Tax Act infringes provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights under s.92(13) of the Constitution Act, 1867
- 02
Whether the manner in which moneys are obtained under those provisions is ultra vires Parliament
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellants argued that s.224(1.2) and (1.3) and the manner of obtaining monies under them improperly infringe provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights by giving federal tax claims priority over provincially created security interests, rendering that manner ultra vires.
- Respondent
- Respondent (Crown) argued the provisions fall within federal taxation power and are valid; Parliament may prescribe collection and priority mechanisms for taxes and the manner of obtaining monies is intra vires federal power.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Income Tax Act s.224; federal taxation powers (Constitutional jurisprudence)
Parliament's taxation power permits legislative measures to collect taxes and provide priority for recovery.
- 02
Constitution Act, 1867, s.92(13); pith and substance doctrine
Provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights is protected by s.92(13) of the Constitution Act, 1867, but may be affected only by valid federal laws properly within Parliament's powers.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The provisions of s.224(1.2) and (1.3) of the Income Tax Act do not constitute an impermissible intrusion into provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights under s.92(13); the manner of obtaining monies under those provisions is intra vires Parliament and therefore valid.
Obiter and limits
- The Court adopted the reasoning of Tallis J.A. of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.
- Costs awarded to the appellants as between solicitor and client are to be paid out of and limited to the interest on the principal of the fund.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed; constitutional question answered in the negative.
- Appeal dismissed
- Constitutional question answered: No
- Costs to the appellants as between solicitor and client payable out of and limited to the interest on the principal of the fund
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Canada · 3 November 1994
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of Canada
Judgment· 3 November 1994
TransGas Ltd. v. Mid-Plains Contractors Ltd. Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1994-11-03 Report [1994] 3 SCR 753 Case number 23549 Judges Lamer, Antonio; La Forest, Gérard V.; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Cory, Peter deCarteret; McLachlin, Beverley; Iacobucci, Frank; Major, John C. On appeal from Saskatchewan Subjects Constitutional law Notes SCC Case Information: 23549 Decision Content TransGas Ltd. v. Mid‑Plains Contractors Ltd., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 753 Non‑Labour Lien Claimants Appellants v. Her Majesty The Queen in right of Canada as represented by the Minister of National Revenue ‑‑ Taxation Respondent and TransGas Limited, Saskatchewan Workers' Compensation Board, P. E. Ben Industries Company Ltd., A. M. Inspection Ltd., Certified Rentals Ltd., Arrow Welding & Industrial Supplies Inc., Permanent Concrete (Division of LaFarge Canada) and Japa Industries Ltd. Respondents Indexed as: TransGas Ltd. v. Mid‑Plains Contractors Ltd. File No.: 23549. 1994: November 3. Present: Lamer C.J. and La Forest, L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for saskatchewan Constitutional law ‑‑ Division of powers ‑‑ Property and civil rights ‑‑ Taxation ‑‑ Income Tax Act providing for seizure of funds owing by tax debtor ‑‑ Priority given over other security interests created by
province ‑‑ Whether or not manner in which money obtained ultra vires federal Parliament ‑‑ Constitution Act, 1867, s. 92(13) ‑‑ Income Tax Act, S.C. 1987, c. 46, s. 224(1.2), (1.3). Statutes and Regulations Cited Constitution Act, 1867, s. 92(13) . Income Tax Act, S.C. 1987, c. 46, s. 224(1.2) [am. by S.C. 1990, c. 34, s. 1], (1.3). APPEAL from a judgment of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal (1993) 105 Sask. R. 211, 32 W.A.C. 211, 101 D.L.R. (4th) 238, [1993] 4 W.W.R. 337, 93 D.T.C. 5391, 1 C.T.C. 280, 14 C.R.R. (2d) 311, 8 C.L.R. (2d) 293, allowing an appeal from a judgment of MacPherson C.J.Q.B. (1991), 98 Sask. R. 1, 86 D.L.R. (4th) 251, [1992] 2 W.W.R. 256, 92 D.T.C. 6074, 1 C.T.C. 151, 48 C.L.R.
39. Appeal dismissed. The constitutional question should be answered in the negative. Murray R. Sawatsky, for the appellants. Edward R. Sojonky, Q.C., and Mark R. Kindrachuk, for the respondent Her Majesty The Queen in right of Canada as represented by the Minister of National Revenue ‑‑ Taxation. No one appearing for the respondent Saskatchewan Workers' Compensation Board. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by Lamer C.J. ‑‑ The Court is of the view that this appeal be dismissed, substantially for the reasons given by Tallis J.A. of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, with costs to the appellants as between solicitor and client payable out of and limited to the interest on the principal of the fund. The constitutional question is answered as follows: Question:Does the manner in which moneys are obtained pursuant to s. 224(1.2) and (1.3) of the Income Tax Act [both enacted by S.C. 1987, c. 46, s. 66; s. 224(1.2) amended by S.C. 1990, c. 34, s. 1] constitute an infringement of the jurisdiction of the Legislature of Saskatchewan with respect to the regulation of property and civil rights pursuant to s. 92(13) of the Constitution Act, 1867 , or any other provincial power under that Act, so that the manner in which moneys are obtained or any part of it is ultra vires the Parliament of Canada? Answer: No. Judgment accordingly. Solicitors for the appellants: McDougall, Ready, Regina. Solicitor for the respondent Her Majesty The Queen in right of Canada as represented by the Minister of National Revenue ‑‑ Taxation: John C. Tait, Ottawa. Solicitor for the respondent Saskatchewan Workers' Compensation Board: Saskatchewan Workers' Compensation Board, Regina.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.