Law360 Canada ( October 20, 2016, 8:00 PM EDT) -- Appeal by the Attorney General of Canada from a judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal setting aside a decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT). The Court had to determine whether hockey gloves, for customs tariff classification purposes, constituted a “glove, mitten or mitt”, oran “article of plastics”. The CITT concluded that certain blockers and catchers imported by the respondent Igloo Vikski Inc. were each classifiable as a “glove, mitten or mitt”. The Federal Court of Appeal, however, held that those blockers and catchers were also classifiable, prima facie, as “articles of plastics”. More particularly, the Court of Appeal found that the CITT had erred by stating that the goods must meet the description of a heading by applying Rule 1 of the General Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized System (General Rules) before Rule 2(b) of the General Rules could be used to extend that heading to cover goods made of mixed substances. In the Court of Appeal’s view, because the goods were prima facie classifiable under two headings, Rule 3 of the General Rules should have been employed to determine the proper classification of the gloves. The Court of Appeal therefore remitted the matter back to the CITT so that it could undertake that Rule 3 analysis....