Hermes numismatique et arts anciens, Inc. v. M.N.R. ( Customs and Excise )
T-954-99
Morneau P.
27/10/99
8 pp.
Motion to strike plaintiff's statement of claim on ground Court did not have jurisdiction to hear said action as statement did not comply with Customs Act-In 1990 plaintiff imported series of mosaics into Canada-In July 1998 defendant proceeded to seize mosaics-Plaintiff did not send defendant written notice required to initiate review process mentioned in Act, s. 129 by responsible Minister-Plaintiff's action directed first at recognition of illegality of seizure due to fact made over six years after offence contrary to provisions of Act, s. 113-Act contemplating only one method of challenging or reviewing forfeiture by seizure, namely notice to Minister within 30 days of offence-Such conclusion consistent with purpose and wording of privative clause in Act, s. 123-Exclusivity of code contained in Act recognized by courts-Motion allowed-Customs Act, R.S.C., 1985 (2nd supp.), c. 1, ss. 113, 123, 129 (as am. by S.C. 1993, c. 25, s. 82).