In finding that provisions of the CCAA dealing with whether contractual claims were claims arising prior to the CCAA filing were not in pari materia with ETA s. 182 and QSTA s. 312 (the “Tax provisions” - dealing with a deemed supply on the payment of contractual damages to the supplier), Kalichman JA stated (at para. 34, footnotes omitted):
The purpose of the CCAA is to provide companies with the means to avoid “the social and economic consequences of commercial bankruptcies” whereas the purpose of the ETA and of the QSTA is to raise revenue for the government. Furthermore, the Tax provisions and the relevant sections of the CCAA can be read separately without leading to an absurd or contradictory result. The fact that they overlap in a particular situation does not make them part of a single legislative scheme. Furthermore, as the judge noted, when Parliament intended for the provisions of the ETA to be read in conjunction with those of the CCAA, that was made explicit.