Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Federal Court of Appeal

 

Cour d'appel fédérale

Date: 20110906

Docket: A-64-11

Citation: 2011 FCA 243

 

CORAM:       NADON J.A.

                        TRUDEL J.A.

                        MAINVILLE J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

SAIPEM UK LIMITED

Appellant

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

 

 

 

Heard at Montréal, Quebec, on September 6, 2011.

Delivered from the Bench at Montréal, Quebec, on September 6, 2011.

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:                                                                             NADON J.A.

 

 


Federal Court of Appeal

 

Cour d'appel fédérale

Date: 20110906

Docket: A-64-11

Citation: 2011 FCA 243

 

CORAM:       NADON J.A.

                        TRUDEL J.A.

                        MAINVILLE J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

SAIPEM UK LIMITED

Appellant

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

NADON J.A.

[1]               Notwithstanding Mr. Lefebvre’s forceful arguments, we have not been persuaded that the judge made any error which would allow us to intervene.

 

[2]               More particularly, with regard to article 22(1) of the Canada – United Kingdom Tax Convention (the Tax Treaty), we are all of the view, substantially for the reasons given by the judge, that the provisions of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.) as amended, at issue discriminate on the basis of residency and not nationality and, as a result, do not constitute discrimination against the Appellant under the Tax Treaty. With regard to article 22(2) of the Tax Treaty, we are all of the view, also for the reasons given by the judge, that the provisions at issue do not constitute less favourable treatment of the Appellant.

 

[3]               In the end, Mr. Lefebvre’s argument, in effect, is that Canada should not be allowed, in the particular circumstances of this case, to discriminate against the Appellant on the basis of residency. Unfortunately, there is nothing in the Tax Treaty to support that view.

 

[4]               Consequently, the appeal will be dismissed with costs in favour of the Respondent.

 

 

 

“M. Nadon”

J.A.

 

 


FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

 

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

DOCKET:                                                                              A-64-11

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                              SAIPEM UK LIMITED

                                                                                                v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                        Montréal, Quebec

 

DATE OF HEARING:                                                          September 6, 2011

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:                                     NADON, TRUDEL, MAINVILLE JJA.

 

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                            NADON J.A.

 

DATED:                                                                                 September 6, 2011

 

 

APPEARANCES:

 

Wilfrid Lefebvre

 

FOR THE APPELLANT

 

Natalie Goulard

Christina Ham

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Norton Rose OR LLP

Montréal, Quebec

 

FOR THE APPELLANT

 

Myles J. Kirvan

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

 

 

 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.