Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

Customs Tariff

Yamaha Motor Canada Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General)

A-1-01

2002 FCA 34, Malone J.A.

24/1/02

4 pp.

Appeal from Canadian International Trade Tribunal's classification of all-terrain utility vehicles as "other motor vehicles principally designed for the transport of persons" instead of "other tractors" as claimed by appellant--Two types of all-terrain vehicles: recreational and utility--Latter have shaft drives, high-traction tires, four-wheel drive, towing capacity, trailer hitch, reverse gear, stiffer load-bearing suspensions, appliances such as blades, ploughs, 3-point hitches--Appellant argued such characteristics demonstrated constructed essentially for use as tractor for pushing, hauling--Explanatory Notes stating tractors meaning wheeled or track-laying vehicles constructed essentially for hauling or pushing--CITT found appellant failed to show goods in issue "constructed essentially for" pushing or hauling, use as tractor--Found utility ATVs could be used not only as tractors by also as recreational vehicles, although contain design features enabling them to push, haul (functions performed by tractors)--Appeal dismissed--Proper standard of review reasonableness--Utility ATV, while capable of pushing, hauling, also performing other functions beyond those normally associated with tractors--Because most of features of utility ATVs useful for other uses, not unreasonable for CITT to conclude not constructed "essentially" for hauling and pushing appliances or loads--CITT interpreted "constructed essentially" in Explanatory Notes as meaning "going to the essence" or raision d'être of vehicle--Such interpretation reasonable--Capacity to perform as tractor not necessitating conclusion vehicle constructed essentially for that purpose--CITT canvassed all evidence, interpreted legislation in manner which makes sense, reached decision open to it on evidence--Not unreasonable for CITT to conclude, in this context, "persons" included driver, even though elsewhere in Customs Tariff, Parliament expressly included driver when referring to transport of persons--Customs Tariff, S.C. 1997, c. 36.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.