[2016] 3 F.C.R. D-4
Customs and Excise
Customs Act
Action seeking order requiring defendant Minister to allow plaintiff’s machinery to be exported to Iran — Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) detaining shipment pending inquiry into whether export permits required — CBSA seizing goods on basis that plaintiff had attempted to export them without proper authorization — Plaintiff found to have contravened Customs Act, R.S.C., 1985 (2nd Supp.), c. 1, s. 131; machinery forfeited — Subsequently, defendant conceding no contravention of Act, offering to return all machinery to plaintiff but maintaining plaintiff needing proper authorization for export — Whether Federal Court having jurisdiction to order exportation of machinery; whether CBSA can refuse exportation until responsible federal agencies give their permission — Court having no jurisdiction to grant relief as defendant conceded no contravention took place — Denial of authority to export goods not penalty, but exercise of duty to ensure compliance with regulations — CBSA cannot authorize exports when authorization governed by another act of Parliament — Not possible to read into words “removal of goods from custody” in Act, s. 132(1)(a) obligation on defendant to permit exportation of goods — Defendant’s concession not that plaintiff complied with export regulations, that machinery can be exported — Concession having limited scope, not binding federal agencies — Defendant can disallow exportation of plaintiff’s machinery pending compliance with current export restrictions — That obligation not inconsistent with defendant’s concession — Action dismissed.
Master Tech Inc. v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) (T-385-14, 2015 FC 1395, O’Reilly J., judgment dated December 18, 2015, 11 pp.)