In the settlement of an action against it by a third party (“Starwood”) for a failure of a property sale agreement to Starwood to close, the appellant agreed to pay $450,000 to Starwood (plus return its deposit) and Starwood agreed to provide a release and to hand over all its rezoning application plans and reports (reflecting that between the signing of the purchase agreement and the scheduled closing date, it had taken over the carriage of an OMB appeal regarding the property).
After finding that the appellant had failed to establish what portion of the $450,000 paid by the appellant was allocable to any acquisition of intellectual property by it, MacPhee J went on to find that the appellant had not satisfied the ITC documentary requirements. It had not demonstrated that it had the GST registration number of the supplier (Starwood) by the time its return was filed (which “alone [was] fatal to the success of the appeal” (para. 41). Furthermore, “there [was] not sufficient evidence to determine an amount of consideration to purchase intellectual property, nor the tax paid or payable” (para. 44). Accordingly, no portion of the $450,000 payment generated an ITC to the appellant.