Continuity of coal transactions governs dealer status; a casual or solitary sale does not trigger licensing requirements.

A person is a "dealer" under the Control Order only if they carry on a continuing business of import, purchase, storage for sale or sale of coal, whether as principal or agent. The phrase "in conjunction with" did not remove the need to show business activity, and the controlling test was continuity of transactions rather than a casual or solitary sale. On the record, there was no proof that the respondent was engaged in such continuing business in rejected coal or coal dust, so licence requirements for its disposal were not established.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent was carrying on the business of sale or storage for sale of coal so as to fall within the definition of "dealer" under the Control Order and require a licence for disposal of rejected coal and coal dust.

Analysis: The definition of "dealer" required a person to carry on the business of import, purchase or storage for sale and sale of coal, whether as a principal or agent. The phrase "in conjunction with" did not dispense with the requirement of business activity. The controlling test was continuity of transactions, and a mere casual or solitary sale did not amount to carrying on business. On the record there was nothing to show that the respondent was engaged in a continuing business of sale or storage for sale of rejected coal or coal dust.

Conclusion: The respondent was not proved to be a dealer carrying on the relevant business, and no licence requirement was established on that basis.

---