The taxpayer provided various services to oil and gas operators respecting the completion and stimulation of wells including pumping cement slurries around well casings, fracturing rock formations with proppants, and acidizing rock formations with a specially-blended acid. Urie, J.A., after finding the common law distinction between a contract for the sale of goods and a contract for work, labour and materials to be irrelevant, stated (p. 6318):
"... the Respondent does not enter into pure service contracts, but, rather processes goods to the operator's/customer's specification which it utilizes to perform the specialized services required of it by its customer. It does so by means of what the Trial Judge described as a 'mobile factory' which utilizes the various materials, mixtures and blends produced for delivery to the well bore ..."
and went on to find that the taxpayer's business therefore entailed the processing of goods for sale.