Estey J stated (at para. 33):
[I]f the interpretation of a taxation statute is unclear, and one reasonable interpretation leads to a deduction to the credit of a taxpayer and the other leaves the taxpayer with no relief from clearly bona fide expenditures in the course of his business activities, the general rules of interpretation of taxing statutes would direct the tribunal to the former interpretation ... [A]nother basic concept in tax law [is] that where the taxing statute is not explicit, reasonable uncertainty or factual ambiguity resulting from lack of explicitness in the statute should be resolved in favour of the taxpayer.
Recurring land acquisition expenditures of the taxpayer in relation to the expanding circumference of its open pit mine were found to be deductible.