A subdivision property of the taxpayer, a developer, was blockaded by Six Nations protesters. To diffuse the conflict, the Ontario government passed a by-law prohibiting any use of the property (rendering it valueless), and ultimately agreed to pay the taxpayer $15,800,000 in exchange for relinquishing its rights to the property and under a court order against the protesters, and for a release.
Before so agreeing but after the taxpayer's business operations were effectively halted, the government also paid $650,000 "to mitigate impact of continued occupation of [the land]." In finding that this amount was not taxable under s. 12(1)(x) as an amount received "in the course of earning income from a business," and after contrasting (at para. 121) the wording of s. 12(1)(a) "which simply says ‘in the course of a business'," C. Miller J stated (at para. 124):
[U]ntil Henco found out about the moratorium, and ultimately the imposition of a rezoning by-law precluding further development, Henco was still in business. ... But ... to the time of the $650,000 payment, though still in business, was Henco in the course of earning income from a business? I believe not.