The Federal Court of Canada has overturned a decision of the
Canadian International Trade Tribunal, which held that the duty
free import of goods into Canada under tariff item No. 9903.00.00
in the Customs Tariff was restricted to materials connected with
farming, agriculture, horticulture or agribusiness, noting that
some goods in the listed items in this tariff item do not fit this
description. The goods in question were to be used in the
manufacture of towers for wind turbines. The Court referred the
issue back to the Trade Tribunal for reconsideration.
(Marmen-Énergie Inc. v. Canada (Border Services Agency), CALN/2014-020,  F.C.J. No. 454, Federal Court of
Customs Duties -- Materials Connected to
Farming, Agriculture, Horticulture and Agribusiness.
Marmen-Énergie Inc. appealed to the Federal Court of
Canada from a ruling of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal
with respect to whether goods used by Marmen-Énergie Inc.
and Marmen Inc., for the manufacturer of towers for wind turbines
can be classified under tariff item No. 9903.00.00 of the schedule
to the Customs Tariff as "articles and materials that enter
into the cost of manufacturer and repair of" or an
"article used in" wind mills and thereby benefit from
duty free treatment pursuant to this classification.
The CITT had concluded that all host goods listed in tariff item
No. 9903.00.00 must have a connection to farming, agriculture,
horticulture or agribusiness and that the goods in issue do not
qualify as they have no such connection.
Decision: Noel, J.A. (Webb and Scott, J.J.A concurring) allowed
the appeal and set aside the judgment of the CITT [at para. 7].
Noel, J.A. agreed with the appellant that it could not be
concluded with certainty that tariff item No. 9903.00.00 required
that all the host goods have a farming, agricultural, horticultural
or agribusiness connection. He agreed that some items under the
classification, such as "machinery for filling bottles used in
the beverage industry" indicated that all listed goods might
not need to be connected to farming, agriculture, horticulture or
agribusiness [at para. 5].
Noel, J.A. referred the matter back to the tribunal for
adjudication based on an analysis which takes into account of the
addition of "machinery for filling bottles for use in the
beverage industry", to the listed items in the tariff item in
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Russell v. Township of Georgian Bay provides a useful reminder of the fact that while municipal officials sometimes appear to hold all of the cards in disputes with home owners, that is not always the case.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).