Federal appeal | Customs and Excise
Appeal
Canadian International Trade Tribunal did not commit any error in its analysis that “through bill of lading” was required for goods to benefit from General Preferential Tariff treatment
Company purchased 1,678 contained of various sized, made in China. When containers were shipped from China, company did not obtain through bills of lading or any other shipping documents. Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) determined that containers did not qualify for General Preferential Tariff (GPT) treatment under Customs Tariff (Can.) because they were not shipped from China to Canada on through bill of lading. Canadian International Trade Tribunal dismissed company’s appeal from decision of CBSA. Tribunal did not review documentation that company had obtained after containers were shipped. Company appealed. Appeal dismissed. Company misunderstood that tribunal had accepted its proposed definition of “through bill of lading.” Although tribunal referred to two definitions proposed by company, it did not specifically adopt them in any part of its reasons. Because tribunal found failed to obtain through bills of lading or any other shipping documents, it was not necessary for tribunal to define through bill of lading. There were simply no shipping documents at all, and this was questions of fact and not subject to review on appeal. Tribunal, however did not commit any error in its analysis with respect to determination that through bill of lading was required in order for goods to benefit from GPT treatment.
Containerwest Manufacturing Ltd. v. Canada (President of Border Services Agency) (Apr. 11, 2016, F.C.A., David Stratas J.A., Wyman W. Webb J.A., and Mary J.L. Gleason J.A., A-351-15) 265 A.C.W.S. (3d) 100.
Canadian International Trade Tribunal did not commit any error in its analysis that “through bill of lading” was required for goods to benefit from General Preferential Tariff treatment
Company purchased 1,678 contained of various sized, made in China. When containers were shipped from China, company did not obtain through bills of lading or any other shipping documents. Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) determined that containers did not qualify for General Preferential Tariff (GPT) treatment under Customs Tariff (Can.) because they were not shipped from China to Canada on through bill of lading. Canadian International Trade Tribunal dismissed company’s appeal from decision of CBSA. Tribunal did not review documentation that company had obtained after containers were shipped. Company appealed. Appeal dismissed. Company misunderstood that tribunal had accepted its proposed definition of “through bill of lading.” Although tribunal referred to two definitions proposed by company, it did not specifically adopt them in any part of its reasons. Because tribunal found failed to obtain through bills of lading or any other shipping documents, it was not necessary for tribunal to define through bill of lading. There were simply no shipping documents at all, and this was questions of fact and not subject to review on appeal. Tribunal, however did not commit any error in its analysis with respect to determination that through bill of lading was required in order for goods to benefit from GPT treatment.
Containerwest Manufacturing Ltd. v. Canada (President of Border Services Agency) (Apr. 11, 2016, F.C.A., David Stratas J.A., Wyman W. Webb J.A., and Mary J.L. Gleason J.A., A-351-15) 265 A.C.W.S. (3d) 100.
