11,315 result(s)
-
4,251.
Agnew v. The Queen - 2002-10-15
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsThe Ontario Securities Commission regulations mandate that the investor deal directly with AIC. [...] [100] Fair enough. If there are any profits from the corporation, taxes will be paid at the corporate level and the shareholders are going to get their share of those profits by way of dividends. [...] [105] In Backman v.Canada, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 367 the Supreme Court of Canada, dealing with the notion of a view to profit, says this:
-
4,252.
Rueca v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001 FCT 541 - 2001-05-29
Federal Court Decisions[8] Error of Jurisdiction, Law, and Breach of Natural Justice or Fairness [...] [15] Procedural Fairness: the Bhagwandass, infra, Decision Not Respected [...] [34] I propose to first deal with Issue 6 which is: Did the respondent breach the principles of fundamental justice or fairness in that reports were considered which were not provided to the applicant?
-
4,253.
Canada (Military Prosecutions) v. Canada (Chief Military Judge) - 2007 FCA 390 - 2007-12-10
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[24] Dealing with this question, the Applications Judge said (Reasons, para. 27): [...] a) le procureur de la poursuite peut faire sa plaidoirie sur les verdicts susceptibles d’être rendus; [...] b) l’accusé peut faire sa plaidoirie sur les verdicts susceptibles d’être rendus;
-
4,254.
Wheeldon v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2012 FC 355 - 2012-03-26
Federal Court Decisions• [10] On May 5, 2011, the Applicant formally appealed the scoring of his award application on the basis of procedural fairness in that he could not meaningfully understand the basis of the scoring. [...] • [11] The Applicant’s judicial review was based on inadequate reasons being a breach of procedural fairness. [...] • [18] In order to deal properly with the merits of this judicial review, the documents which were before the Council, both initially and on appeal, should be before this Court (see 1185740 Ontario Ltd v Canada (Minister of National Revenue – MNR) (1999), 247 NR 287).
-
4,255.
Leduc v. Turner - 2010 FCA 99 - 2010-04-13
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsThis is essentially a factual conclusion that must stand absent palpable and overriding error, or a breach of the duty of procedural fairness. [...] [5] It is argued for Ms. Leduc that the absence of a transcript of the Board hearing is a breach of the Board’s duty of procedural fairness because, without a transcript, this Court is unable to deal effectively with the issues raised in the application for judicial review.
-
4,256.
Lee v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 236 - 2008-02-21
Federal Court Decisions[4] Justice Shore of this Court, a judge very experienced in matters dealing with the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c-27 as amended (IRPA), gave careful consideration to the issue of temporary resident permits (TRP) in his recent discussion in Farhat v. Canada (MCI), 2006 FC 1275. [...] [6] The officer gave the Applicant a full and fair opportunity to submit his case. [...] The officer fairly considered the relevant circumstances. The decision made is not patently unreasonable.
-
4,257.
Rehman v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 178 - 2005-02-08
Federal Court Decisions[9] In dealing with the issue of whether or not there is serious possibility of death or cruel and unusual treatment or punishment should the applicants return to Pakistan, the RPD concluded with a single sentence that read, "The panel finds there is not." [...] [10] The Applicant submits that adjournments of fifteen months, twelve months and eleven months constitute a denial of procedural fairness. [...] It is argued that it is not reasonable for the RPD to recall and fairly assess testimony provided over such a long period of time.
-
4,258.
Rodrigues v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2003 FCT 146 - 2003-02-11
Federal Court Decisions[10] In my opinion, this amounts to a breach of the duty of procedural fairness, particularly in a situation where the Visa Officer requested the further material. [...] Her manner of dealing with the material rendered the "fairness letter" of May 15, 2001, by which she asked the Applicant to submit further documentation, meaningless.
-
4,259.
Noel v. Cold Lake First Nations - 2016 FC 1321 - 2016-11-30
Federal Court DecisionsThe Appeal Committee convened a hearing to deal with numerous appeals arising from the elections for the CLFN Chief and Council on August 10, 2016. [...] B. Was the Appeal Committee’s decision procedurally fair? C. Was the Appeal Committee’s decision reasonable? [...] They therefore maintain that Mr. Noel received a higher degree of procedural fairness than has been found necessary in similar circumstances.
-
4,260.
Sadiq v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 955 - 2015-08-07
Federal Court Decisions2. Whether the Officer breached the duty of procedural fairness in failing to present his or her concerns to the Applicant before rendering the Decision. [...] As a result, procedural fairness does not typically require work permit applicants to be given an opportunity to respond to an officer’s concerns. [...] This is not a procedural fairness issue. See Hamza v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 FC 264 at paras 21-24.
-
4,261.
Linklater v. Peter Ballantyne Cree Nation Election Appeal Committee - 2011 FC 1353 - 2011-11-23
Federal Court Decisionsb) Did the Appeal Committee fail to observe a principle of natural justice and/or procedural fairness by denying the applicant an opportunity to make representations and by creating a reasonable apprehension of bias? [...] [13] The second issue involves questions of procedural fairness which will attract the correctness standard of review. [...] [13] Considering my conclusion on this first issue, it is not necessary that I deal with the issue of procedural fairness.
-
4,262.
McBride v. Canada - 2011 FC 1019 - 2011-08-25
Federal Court DecisionsOn the other hand, questions of procedural fairness are reviewable on the standard of correctness. [...] [9] In the impugned decision, the CDS concludes that the applicant was afforded procedural fairness throughout the AR/MEL process. [...] On 16 June 2006, he noted that you still had medical problems to deal with.
-
4,263.
Zhong v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 279 - 2011-03-09
Federal Court Decisions(a) Did the Board breach its duty of procedural fairness? (b) Did the Board err in assessing the issue of exclusion? [...] In dealing with similar allegations in Martinez v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 1065, 35 Admin LR (4th) 261, Justice Judith Snider noted at para 12: [...] Furthermore, I am not persuaded that the Applicant’s right to a fair hearing was compromised in this case.
-
4,264.
Lowe v. Landmark Transport Inc. - 2007 FC 217 - 2007-02-26
Federal Court Decisions[2] The Applicant, in this judicial review, raised the issue of the error in dismissing the complaint, particularly with respect to the absence of medical certificates, the issue of the fairness and thoroughness of the investigation and the fairness of the Commissioner’s decision. [...] It is alleged that the investigator was not fair, balanced or neutral. [...] C. Thoroughness/Fairness of Investigation [34] The Applicant’s principal contention is that the investigation was not thorough or fair because the investigator did not investigate the effects of MD generally or in respect of Mr. Lowe specifically.
-
4,265.
Gutierrez Trujillo v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2006 FC 414 - 2006-04-10
Federal Court DecisionsThus, the potential prejudice to the Respondent, and further, to a fair disposition of the application for judicial review was, I am satisfied, substantial. [...] If the Court concludes that there has been a breach of procedural fairness, no deference is due and it will set aside the decision. [...] I find it useful to reproduce the following passage from L. Waldman, Immigration Law and Practice, ... which deals with plausibility findings and the impact of documentary evidence that may be before the tribunal:
-
4,266.
Martinez v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 1121 - 2005-08-16
Federal Court Decisions1. Did the Board commit a breach of procedural fairness in applying paragraph 19 of Guideline 7 and allowing the Refugee Protection Officer (RPO) to start questioning the applicant? [...] Subsection 162(2) of the Act further provides that it shall deal with proceedings before it as informally and quickly as the circumstances and the considerations of fairness and natural justice permit. [...] Thus, I do not find that the order of questioning prevented the applicants from presenting their evidence or detracted from the overall fairness of the hearing.
-
4,267.
Mah v. The Queen - 2003 TCC 720 - 2003-10-03
Tax Court of Canada Judgments11. In the course of dealing with the Notice of Objection, the Appellant and the representative of the CCRA agreed [...] (a) that the fair market value of the 250 shares of the Company on December 15, 1996 was $1,120,000; [...] The fair market value of the common shares immediately before the exchange was greater than the fair market value, immediately after the exchange, of the shares received.
-
4,268.
Staltari v. The Queen - 2015 TCC 123 - 2015-06-05
Tax Court of Canada Judgments(a) the fair market value of the gift is certified by the Minister of the Environment, [...] (i) to a person with whom the taxpayer was not dealing at arm’s length for no proceeds or for proceeds less than the fair market value thereof at the time the taxpayer so disposed of it, [...] the taxpayer shall be deemed to have received proceeds of disposition therefor equal to that fair market value; and . . .
-
4,269.
Duncan v. The Queen - 2001-01-08
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsHe feels that he could interest people in the local Vancouver area, however, given his past numerous business dealings with you, he asked us to present it to you first. [...] Interfin, who will be a key to making this deal work, is familiar with this name and maybe more comfortable dealing with Klink than dealing with a completely new entity. [...] They could fairly be described as puerile. To the extent that they project revenues and expenses, there is nothing to rationalize the estimates – they are simply numbers selected by Mr. Belanger without explanation.
-
4,270.
Romans v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2003 FC 1524 - 2003-12-29
Federal Court DecisionsOn the other hand stands Canada's constitutional commitment to liberty and fair process. [...] [78] The Immigration system is not equipped to deal with the exigencies of this situation. [...] On the other hand stands Canada's constitutional commitment to liberty and fair process.
-
4,271.
Shakov v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2015 FC 1416 - 2015-12-23
Federal Court Decisions3. Did the PSC breach procedural fairness in rescinding the FJA’s delegated authority to reappoint Mr. Shakov? [...] However, correctness is the standard of review on questions of procedural fairness (Mabrouk v Canada (Public Service Commission), 2014 FC 166 at para 31 [Mabrouk]). [...] [21] There was no need for a bilingual IP Director, according to Mr. Shakov, because all the employees under his supervision were Anglophone and because he did not deal directly with the public.
-
4,272.
Karolinska Institutet Innovations AB v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2013 FC 715 - 2013-06-27
Federal Court Decisions[20] In the present case, we are not dealing with an interpretation of Patent Rule 3.1; rather, we are dealing with how the Commissioner (CIPO) did or did not give proper meaning and effect to the words “clear but unsuccessful attempt to pay the fee” in the particular circumstances of this case. [...] 12. Every enactment is deemed remedial, and shall be given such fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation as best ensures the attainment of its objects. [...] As provided by section 12 of the Interpretation Act, section 3.1 is a remedial provision; it is to be given a fair, large and liberal construction.
-
4,273.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Almon Equipment Limited - 2010 FCA 193 - 2010-07-20
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions(1) Fairness to competitors in the procurement system. A fair procurement system that applies one set of transparent rules to all bidders increases confidence in the system, and encourages increased participation in competitions. [...] In short, fairness gives taxpayers value for the taxes they pay. (2) Ensuring competition among bidders. [...] But it did not deal with any of the other remedies sought by Almon, described in paragraph 35, above.
-
4,274.
Nguyen v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2024 FC 609 - 2024-04-23
Federal Court Decisions[8] On October 27, 2022, IRCC sent the Applicant a procedural fairness letter. [...] [10] The issue is whether the Officer’s decision was reasonable and procedurally fair. [...] [21] Given my finding regarding reasonableness, I will not deal with the procedural fairness issues.
-
4,275.
Kieu v. The King - 2023 TCC 160 - 2023-11-20
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsThis application to review did not deal with the provisions of sections 166.1 and 166.2 ITA as are now applicable. [...] [20] Unfortunately, as mentioned in the Pietrovito [5] decision below, the Court does not have authority when it comes to equity and fairness: [...] 4 ... It is not open to the Court to make exceptions to statutory provisions on the grounds of fairness or equity.