TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. v. Minister of Revenue (1992), 62 O.A.C. 105 -- summary under Subsection 181.2(4)

By services, 28 November, 2015

The respondent (a pipeline company) agreed to purchase certain minimum quantities of gas each year. If it was unable to take delivery of the agreed minimum it was nevertheless required to pay the producer the full minimum purchase price and it correspondingly became entitled to credit for such payments against future purchases of gas.

Because the respondent expected in making the required minimum payments that it would, in the fullness of time, call for a delivery of an equivalent amount of gas for which it had so paid, such minimum fell within dictionary definitions of 'advance' as a 'payment [made] beforehand or in anticipation' and a 'payment made before ... the completion of an obligation for which it is to be paid' (at p. 107). Because the object of the contracts was to secure gas for the respondent's business, it also followed that the advances were "investments", i.e., expenditures "for future benefits or advantages".

Topics and taglines
Words and phrases
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
335864
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em><a name=\"TransCanadaPipelinesLtd\"></a>TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. v. Minister of Revenue</em></strong> (1992), 62 O.A.C. 105",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}