Anita C. Veiga-Minhinnett

The appellant gold mining company engaged in financial hedging transactions to protect against fluctuations in the spot price of gold.

The Minister of Finance assessed the net gains from these transactions as taxable 'proceeds' under the Mining Tax Act.

The trial judge upheld the assessment, finding a sufficient nexus between the transactions and the mine's output.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the statutory definition of 'hedging' is clear and unambiguous, requiring the fixing of a price for the actual output of a mine before delivery.

Since the appellant sold all its gold at spot prices and did not deliver any gold pursuant to the hedging contracts, the gains were not taxable under the Act.

The appellant imported and distributed disposable contact lenses.

To promote its brand, it supplied free contact lenses to authorized practitioners, who then dispensed them to patients.

The Minister of Finance assessed retail sales tax on these free lenses.

The appellant objected, arguing the lenses were exempt under s. 7(1)37 of the Retail Sales Tax Act as optical appliances sold on prescription.

The trial judge dismissed the appeal, finding the transaction was between the appellant and practitioners without a prescription.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the 'sale' occurred when the patient received the lenses on prescription, thus qualifying for the tax exemption.