24 total
Costs of $8,000 awarded to the respondent in appeal for both the trial and appeal.
In a costs endorsement following an appeal, the Divisional Court awarded the respondent in appeal costs for both the trial below and the appeal.
Guided by the principles in Boucher v. Public Accountants Council, the court fixed the costs at $4,000 for the trial and $4,000 for the appeal, for a total of $8,000 payable by the appellant in appeal.
Appeal from discharge of tax assessment dismissed; vendor not liable where tax-included pricing not authorized.
The Minister of Finance appealed a decision discharging a tax assessment against a vendor operating 25-cent single-coin vending machines.
The vendor argued it was impossible to collect and remit retail sales tax because the machines could not accept more than 25 cents or give change.
The Divisional Court held that compliance was possible if the vendor had applied for and used tax-included pricing under the Retail Sales Tax Act.
However, because the vendor was not actually using tax-included pricing during the relevant period, the Minister was not entitled to issue the assessment under section 18(3) of the Act.
The appeal was allowed in part to vary the judgment below, but otherwise dismissed.
Away game locker rooms do not constitute permanent establishments for employer health tax purposes.
The Minister of Finance appealed a decision declaring that the locker rooms and coaches' rooms used by professional sports teams (the Blue Jays, Maple Leafs, and Raptors) during away games outside Ontario constituted 'permanent establishments' under the Employer Health Tax Act.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the teams' use of away venues was too transitory to be considered a fixed place of business.
Furthermore, the sports equipment brought to these venues did not qualify as 'substantial machinery or equipment' under the Act.
Appeal dismissed; Crown entitled to set-off damages payable against monies owed under a restitution order.
The appellant appealed an order allowing the Crown to set-off damages payable to the appellant under a judgment against monies the appellant owed to the Crown under a restitution order.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the combined effect of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act and the Financial Administration Act entitled the Crown to the set-off.
The court also rejected arguments based on bankruptcy principles and res judicata.