Digests

CuSTomS anD ExCISE

Customs Act

Appeal from Federal Court decision (2009 FC 389) dismissing appellants’ statement of claim because action subject to limitation period of three months as per Customs Act, R.S.C., 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 1, s. 106(1)—Appellants French producer of dairy products, Quebec subsidiary—Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) creating National Customs Ruling (NCR) program, providing guidance on tariff classification for imported goods—NCR issued to Quebec corporation acting as trade consultant, agent for appellants determining milk products sought to be classified (PROMILK) milk protein isolates subject to duty of 6.5 percent—Appellants thus proceeding with plans to market PROMILK in Canada on that basis—CCRA officer issuing new NCR in 2003, imposing duty of 270 percent—That decision successfully appealed before Canadian International Trade Tribunal in 2005 ([2005] C.I.T.T. No. 13 (QL), affd 2006 FCA 41)—Appellants bringing action against Crown for damages nearly three years after 2003 NCR—Federal Court Judge not erring when deciding s. 106(1) relevant limitation provision—Both Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-50, s. 32, Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 39 providing that where cause of action arising in province, laws pertaining to prescription, limitation of actions in that province apply—However, both these sections also stipulating that where applicable time-bar found in another Act of Parliament, that provision applying—CCRA officer acting within performance of duties, decision clearly done in administration, enforcement of Act, thus allowing Crown to invoke Act, s. 106—Federal Court Judge correctly determining appellants’ cause of action arising from 2003 NCR—All facts necessary for instituting action known to appellants at very latest at time CITT decision issued in 2005—Appeal dismissed.

Ingredia S.A. v. Canada (A-216-09, 2010 FCA 176, Nadon J.A., judgment dated July 6, 2010, 17 pp.)