Date: 20000117
Docket: A-45-97
CORAM: STRAYER J.A.
NOËL J.A.
MALONE J.A.
B E T W E E N:
THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Appellant
" and "
SPECIALIZED BICYCLE COMPONENTS CANADA, INC.
Respondent
HEARD at Ottawa, Ontario on Monday, January 17, 2000
JUDGMENT delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario on Monday, January 17, 2000
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: STRAYER J.A.
Date: 20000117
Docket: A-45-97
C O R A M: STRAYER J.A.
NOËL J.A.
MALONE J.A.
B E T W E E N:
THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Appellant
" and "
SPECIALIZED BICYCLE COMPONENTS CANADA, INC.
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario
on January 17, 2000)
STRAYER J.A.
[1] This is an appeal under section 62 of the Special Import Measures Act from a decision of the Canadian International Tribunal ("CITT") with respect to determinations as to "normal value" of bicycles being exported into Canada. The appellant appeals against findings of the CITT that adjustments downwards in the normal value of bicycles sold by the exporter in the United States, the country of export to Canada, should be made because of the cash discounts and costs of product liability there which reduce the value of those U.S. sales.
[2] Section 62 authorizes an appeal to this Court only on questions of law. It appears to us that the issues raised here involve mixed questions of law and fact. That is, they involve a determination as to the meaning of legislative provisions as applied to the facts of this case. However, to the extent that issues of law are involved, we have the jurisdiction and responsibility to address them. The question then arises as to what standard of review should be applied. We are of the view that, given the expert and specialized nature of the CITT in trade matters, and given the previous jurisprudence of this Court in respect of the standard of review on appeals from the Tribunal,1 the relevant standard is that of reasonableness concerning the interpretations of language of the statute and regulations made within the undisputed jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
[3] Applying the standard of reasonableness, it appears to us that there are reasons in support of the Tribunal's interpretation of the Act and the regulations in respect of "normal value" which, in the words of Iacobucci J. in Director of Investigation and Research v. Southam2 "can stand up to a somewhat probing examination".
[4] The appeal should therefore be dismissed with costs.
J.A.
__________________1 Deputy Minister of National Revenue v. Schrader Automotive Inc. (1999) 240 N.R. 381; 2703319 Canada Inc. v. Deputy Minister of National Revenue A-155-98, November 25, 1999.