Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

CASE NO.                                                    VOL. NO.

 

Municipal Contracting Limited, as agent for

and on behalf of Municipal Enterprises Limited                                                                        Plaintiff

 

- and -

 

The Attorney General of Nova Scotia,

representing Her Majesty The Queen

in the Right of the Province of Nova Scotia                                                                         Defendant

 

Justice M. Heather Robertson                       Halifax, NS                                                    SH 108819

                                                                                                                            

 

                                                        LIBRARY HEADING

 

[Cite as: Municipal Contracting Ltd. v. Nova Scotia (Attorney General) 2001NSSC192]

 

Heard:             October 30, 21, November 1, 2, 3, 6 7, 8, 9, 10, 2000 and March 12, 2001. 

Post-Trial

Submissions: April 17 and May 4, 8, and 16, 2001.  

 

Decision:                    December 10, 2001    

 

Subject:                     The correct statutory interpretation of the Gasoline and Diesel Oil Tax Act Regulations as it relates to a claim for refund of taxes paid in respect of diesel oil purchased, stored or used in the manufacture and production of non-renewable resources, quarried rock products.

 

Issue estoppel and judicial comity were also addressed in the light of an earlier decision which was reversed on appeal on jurisdictional grounds.

 

Summary:                   The plaintiff filed applications for refund of taxes paid between 1989-1996 “used to operate...machinery and apparatus which were used in the manufacture or production of goods for sale” i.e. crushed rock products which were by definition a non-renewable resource.  The amount of refund claimed was $896,466.  The claims were denied by the Minister of Finance.

 

Held:                           The Minister correctly interpreted section 34 of the Regulations and subparagraph (12)(1)(k)iii and paragraph 14(d) in refusing the refund on tax paid.  The product manufactured for sale was a non-renewable resource within the meaning and intent of the legislation.

 

 

 

 

THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.  QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT FROM THIS COVER SHEET.

 


 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.