The taxpayer was incorporated for the purpose of providing unbiased and well researched news and public affairs programs. The Court of Appeal affirmed the Minister's decision that the taxpayer's purposes did not qualify as charitable purposes, as they fell under none of the recognized heads of charitable purpose. Applying Vancouver Society, The Court of Appeal found that the proposed activities did not fall under the head of education, as they did not meet the threshold of being a "legitimate, targeted attempt at educating others, whether through formal or informal instruction, training, plans of self-study, or otherwise." (Vancouver Society at para. 171.)
Neither did the proposed activities fall under the head of "other purposes beneficial to the community." Mainville J.A. stated (at para. 30) that, "in order to be charitable, the appellant's purposes must be of special benefit to the community, with an eye to the society's current social, moral, and economic context." The taxpayer identified its audience as the general public, which meant its services were not targeted at a group in need of special assistance. Moreover, the taxpayer did not set out to create new information infrastructure for the public, but only to provide information over existing infrastructure - a fact which distinguished the present case from Vancouver FreeNet.