The taxpayer was promoted to a management position, and the expanded responsibilities prompted him to move closer to work. The Minister disallowed his moving expenses on the basis that he had not moved to a "new" work location and, instead, had stayed put. Webb J allowed the taxpayer's appeal. The definition of "eligible relocation" in s. 248(1) requires that:
the relocation occurs to enable the taxpayer
(i) to carry on a business or to be employed at a location (in section 62 and this definition referred to as "the new work location") ... .
Webb J stated (at para. 8):
"[N]ew work location" is simply the name or the label that was placed on the particular location. The words used as part of this label (in particular new and work) should not be used to define the expression "new work location".