Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Wong v. M.N.R.

T-768-95

Rouleau J.

29/12/95

6 pp.

Application pursuant to Federal Court Act, s. 17(2) for return of money paid to obtain release of car seized when borrower of applicant's car caught in possession of 883 cartons of cigarettes on which excise duty unpaid-Applicant obtaining release of vehicle upon payment of $4,800 pursuant to Excise Act, s. 112-S. 112 permitting delivery up to claimant of any seized article upon payment of full value thereof-Respondent conceding applicant innocent of any complicity, collusion in offence-On application pursuant to Excise Act, s. 164, Reed J. declaring applicant having interest in vehicle; interest not affected by seizure-Stating nothing in s. 164 allowing her to order return of money and suggesting application be made pursuant to Federal Court Act, s. 17(2)-Respondent submitting Court having jurisdiction to adjudicate where money or goods in possession of Crown, but not substantive rights; that applicant not providing any basis for substantive right and therefore no remedy should be granted-Money paid pursuant to s. 112 deposited as substitute for vehicle-No doubt applicant having right to car-Applicant innocent third party-Applicant having right in money deposited as security and which was substitute for seizure-Minister's representative's position giving rise to ridiculous exchange, waste of parties', Court's time-To object to Court exercising power under Federal Court Act, s. 17(2) because claimant not proving "substantive right" almost absurdity-If Court cannot make orders or declarations affecting "rights" may just as well not exist-To argue against power of Federal Court Act and suggest Minister not obligated to repay funds wrongfully detained because no provision in Act illogical, could lead to abuse of process-Care required in drafting defences to ensure more concise, helpful to Court rather than spouting verbiage in attempt to intimidate-S. 112 providing when article ordered to be restored, court before which claim heard shall order collector to pay over to claimant proceeds of sale in lieu of awarding restitution-Restoration awarded under Federal Court Act, s. 17(2) and Excise Act, s. 112(1)-Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 17(2) (as am. by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 3)-Excise Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. E-14, ss. 112, 164.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.