Supreme Court Judgments

Decision Information

Decision Content

Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd. v. British Columbia (Re‑hearing), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1067


Air Canada                                                                                         Appellant




Her Majesty the Queen in right of the

Province of British Columbia, the Attorney

General of British Columbia, the Minister of

Finance of the Province of British Columbia

and E. J. Turner in his capacity as

Commissioner, Social Service Tax Act                                             Respondents


Indexed as:  Canadian Pacific Air Lines Ltd. v. British Columbia (re‑hearing)


File No.:  19602.


Re‑hearing:  1989:  November 6.


Present:  Dickson C.J. and Lamer, Wilson, La Forest and L'Heureux‑Dubé JJ.


application to vary judgment of supreme court of canada


                   Judgments and orders ‑‑ Judgment varied ‑‑ Interest ‑‑ Prejudgment and postjudgment interest awarded.


                   RE‑HEARING of an appeal, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1133, for the purpose of varying the judgment.  Application to vary judgment allowed on re‑hearing.


                   D. M. M. Goldie, Q.C., for the appellant.


                   W. G. Burke‑Robertson, Q.C., for the respondents.


                   The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by


                   The Chief Justice ‑‑ An order will go that the Social Service Tax judgment of this Court dated May 4, 1989, be varied to provide that the judgment include prejudgment interest at the District Registrar's rate from time to time in force from the date of the several remittances to March 15, 1984, and that postjudgment interest on the judgment including prejudgment interest be awarded for the period following March 15, 1984*.  The appellant is entitled to its costs of the re‑hearing.


                   Judgment accordingly.


                   Solicitors for the appellant:  Russell & DuMoulin, Vancouver.


                   Solicitor for the respondents:  The Attorney General of British Columbia, Victoria.

     * See Erratum [1992] 2 S.C.R. iv

 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.