lease

By services, 27 August, 2020

J.D. Irving Limited v. Agence du revenu du Québec, 2020 QCCQ 2423, aff'd 2022 QCCA 241 -- summary under Subsection 1100(17)

The taxpayer ("JDI") and another pulp and paper company in the Irving group (“IPPL”) participated in transactions to effectively transfer non-capital losses (“NCLs”) from an oil refining company (“IOL”) in the Irving group to the taxpayer. In December 2002, IOL acquired pollution control equipment (“PCE”), that IPPL had been using in its pulp facilities, from IPPL under TA s. 85(1) and TA s. 518, at an agreed amount of $3.

24 December 2015 Internal T.I. 2014-0560831I7 - International shipping -- summary under Paragraph 81(1)(c)

The Taxpayer is a non-resident corporation that carries on business in many countries, including Canada. The activities of the non-resident Taxpayer in Canada help satisfy the shipping requirements of related companies (the “Related Party Customers”), who generally are residents of Canada or non-residents carrying on business in Canada and who are not themselves in the shipping business. Would the Taxpayer’s activities carried on in Canada be considered “the operation of a ship in international traffic” under the previous version of s.

By services, 28 November, 2015

Barclays Mercantile Industrial Finance Ltd. v. Melluish, [1990] BTC 209 (Ch. D.) -- summary under Subsection 1100(17)

A British corporation ("WBDL") entered into a distribution agreement with a California corporation ("WBI") pursuant to which WBI was granted the right to license and to exhibit and distribute the picture, largely in Canada and the U.S., but with WBDL retaining control of the master negative. WBDL was found not to be "leasing" the film to WBI because it did not provide "exclusive possession at a rent for a term" (see p. 243).

By services, 28 November, 2015

Canadian Acceptance Corp. Ltd. v. Regent Park Butcher Shop Ltd. (1969), 67 WWR 297 (Man. C.A.) -- summary under Subsection 1100(17)

Dickson J.A. found that the hiring of a cash register was a chattel lease notwithstanding a clause that provided that the lease was irrevocable for the full term and that the aggregate rentals would not abate by reason of the hirer's right to retake possession on default. The right of the hirer to collect the full balance of rentals for the remaining term following a default (minus any proceeds received from a sale or re-leasing within the 60-day period following default) instead represented a penalty clause that was void.

lease