11,315 result(s)
-
4,276.
Amin v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 670 - 2021-06-25
Federal Court DecisionsDid the Panel breach the duty of procedural fairness? B. Is the Decision reasonable? [...] I cannot find that the Panel breached its duty of procedural fairness for failing to canvass this specific issue. [...] Failing to deal with the positive, consistent evidence of the Applicant in the Panel’s analysis undermines the transparency, intelligibility and justifiability of the Decision.
-
4,277.
Estimable v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 541 - 2020-04-23
Federal Court DecisionsDoes the RPD’s refusal to grant an adjournment of the hearing violate the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness? [...] [20] Tab 3.4 deals with the information normally found on a Haitian national identity card. [...] B. Does the RPD’s refusal to grant an adjournment of the hearing violate the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness?
-
4,278.
Abraham v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2016 FC 390 - 2016-04-08
Federal Court DecisionsHe alleges that the Board thus breached the rules of procedural fairness. [...] [10] As I recently stated in Coon v. Canada (Procureur général) 2016 CF 340 [Coon], regarding parole, although the Court is theoretically dealing with an application for judicial review of the Appeal Division’s decision, the Court actually has to examine the legality of the Board’s decision when, as in this case, the Appeal [...] [16] Therefore, even though it is understood that parole is granted at the Board’s discretion, the Board must nonetheless follow the requirements of procedural fairness when deciding whether or not to grant parole (Ouellette, above, at paragraph 30).
-
4,279.
Chelaru v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2012 FC 1535 - 2012-12-20
Federal Court Decisions[22] The question of whether the RPD erred in cutting off the Applicant’s testimony is one related to procedural fairness. [...] The procedural fairness issue that arises in this case is to be assessed on a standard of correctness. [...] fairness for administrative efficiency is not a permissible trade-off, and therefore the RPD erred by not discharging its statutory obligation under s 162(2) of the IRPA to “deal with all proceedings before it as informally and quickly as the circumstances and the considerations of fairness and natural justice permit.”
-
4,280.
Liu v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2012 FC 1062 - 2012-09-07
Federal Court Decisions[12] Dealing with the merits of the appeal, the Board considered the factors affirmed in Chieu v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2002 SCC 3, and reviewed the applicant's testimony relevant to each factor. [...] a. Was the applicant denied procedural fairness? b. Is the Board’s decision on the merits of the appeal reasonable? [...] Was the applicant denied procedural fairness? [18] The applicant submits that he was not afforded due process because his adjournment request was denied.
-
4,281.
Reza Azali v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 517 - 2008-04-25
Federal Court Decisions[12] The third and final question deals with the opportunity to respond, and as such is a question of procedural fairness. [...] It is settled law that questions of procedural fairness are reviewed on a standard of correctness. [...] Their duty of fairness does not require that the applicants be confronted with information which they themselves supplied.
-
4,282.
LUIS ALEJANDRO LEMUS ORTIS and MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION - 2006 FC 404 - 2006-04-10
Federal Court Decisions[6] After dealing extensively with the “reverse-order questioning” or Chairperson’s Guideline 7 issues, the Board turned to the substantive elements of the Applicant’s claim to protection. [...] In Baker, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that in certain circumstances, the duty of procedural fairness requires the provisions [sic] of written reasons for a decision. [...] [22] Where a breach of procedural fairness and natural justice is found, no pragmatic and functional analysis to establish a standard of review is required.
-
4,283.
Grant v. Canada - 2003 FCA 77 - 2003-02-13
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsIn support of her application, she has filed another Affidavit sworn subsequent to the hearing of the Appeal in the Tax Court in which she reiterates some of the evidence put before the Tax Court and deals with some matters apparently not put before the Tax Court. [...] [15] The absence of discovery as an available procedure in informal proceedings does not provide an excuse for the denial of fairness to a party bringing an appeal under that procedure. [...] As the authenticity of Brian Slocum's signature on Form T1157 was the issue which the taxpayer had to address before the Tax Court, fairness required that the taxpayer be allowed to have an expert examine that document prior to the hearing.
-
4,284.
So v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001 FCT 733 - 2001-07-03
Federal Court Decisions(a) whether the applicant was given a fair opportunity to present her case to the Citizenship Judge; [...] [18] The applicant submits that the Citizenship Judge breached his duty of procedural fairness since he did not put forward the issue of "Canadianization" during the interview. [...] [25] The applicant contends that the "centrality of the mode of living" test laid down in Re Papadogiorgakis and Re Koo is the principal legal test for residence when dealing with students.
-
4,285.
Zarzour v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2000-01-28
Federal Court DecisionsThat decision is subject to a duty to observe the requirements of procedural fairness.5 Public authorities which make administrative decisions affecting an individual"s rights and privileges must observe the requirements of procedural fairness, consistent with the circumstances of the case. [...] In the situation we are dealing with here, guilt was not what had to be confirmed, it was whether the information received from six different sources was sufficient to raise a valid concern and warrant the transfer. [...] Accordingly, the fairness obligation also requires that the inmate receive whatever information is needed to be able to make his comments.
-
4,286.
Gil v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1999-07-16
Federal Court DecisionsIn recognition of their expertise in the factual issues with which they deal, administrative tribunals are also afforded considerable latitude in their assessment of the relevance and probative value of material that is tendered as evidence in their proceedings. [...] In so doing, he submitted, the presiding member erred in law or breached the duty of fairness. [...] Administrative tribunals are masters of their own procedure, and subject to any applicable statutory rules and to the duty of fairness, courts should not lightly interfere with their exercise of discretion in the conduct of their hearings.
-
4,287.
Ar Zrig v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2009 FC 629 - 2009-06-12
Federal Court Decisions[58] The respondent submits that the Minister respected procedural fairness in applying paragraph 36(1)(c). [...] CIC notified the applicant, despite the fact that it was not obligatory to do so, that another decision would or could be issued, given the provisions of the Act dealing with security and criminality. [...] [61] In this case, on April 7, 2003, a majority of the Court of Appeal upheld the applicant’s inadmissibility under paragraph 1F(b) and stated that there was no need to deal with the issues related to the applicability of paragraph 1F(c).
-
4,288.
Schmidt v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FCA 55 - 2018-03-20
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[11] We are dealing with legislation that imposes obligations on the Minister and the Clerk of the Privy Council (in consultation with the Deputy Minister) to perform some action. [...] As the authorities suggest, we are to investigate the text, context and purpose of the legislation as objectively and fairly as we can. [...] [35] On this subject, we are dealing with legislative provisions that, among other things, require the vetting of proposed legislation for inconsistency with the Charter.
-
4,289.
Torres v. The Queen - 2013 TCC 380 - 2013-12-02
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[16] Ms. Eva Torres is an insurance broker with Canada Protection Plan, dealing with health, dental and travel insurance. [...] [41] Ms. Carrol Strachan is a long time Air Canada flight attendant who claimed to have a fair to good understanding of accounting, though did not prepare her own tax returns. [...] [77] It is difficult to feel a great deal of sympathy for the Appellants notwithstanding some presented as most sympathetic characters, simply duped by the bad guys.
-
4,290.
Lyrtech RD Inc. v. The Queen - 2013 TCC 12 - 2013-01-24
Tax Court of Canada Judgments28. On June 1, 2005, 4296621 granted the appellant an option to purchase at fair market value all of the shares of either 4296648 or 4296630. [...] (II) another person with whom the particular person or partnership, or a member of the particular partnership, does not deal at arm’s length, [...] (III) a person or partnership with whom the other person referred to in subclause (II) does not deal at arm’s length,
-
4,291.
Matte v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2012 FC 761 - 2012-06-15
Federal Court Decisions[27] After dealing with the Applicants’ motion to strike the Original Narrative, the RPD dealt with the merits of their claims. [...] By relying on this document, the RPD breached their right to procedural fairness. [...] I will deal with each in turn. As a general point, the Applicants cite very little authority for the positions they take.
-
4,292.
Purdue Pharma v. Pharmascience Inc. - 2009 FC 726 - 2009-07-16
Federal Court Decisions[5] I shall deal with the application as follows: Paragraph(s) Patents of Invention – A Few Basics [...] Pharmacokinetics is that branch of pharmacology which deals with the movement of drugs within the body. [...] He deals with pharmacokinetics. [46] Dr. Abram graduated with his medical degree from Jefferson Medical College in 1970.
-
4,293.
Nowoczin v. The Queen - 2007 TCC 275 - 2007-05-21
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[23] Dealing with the concept that has come to be known as the doctrine of secondary intention, Judge Christie – near the end of paragraph 21 and continuing in the next paragraph stated: [...] He was also deemed to have paid as a recipient and to have collected as a supplier, at the time of occupation, tax in respect of the supply calculated on the fair market value of the complex when he occupied it. [...] [33] The Notice of Decision issued by the Minister confirmed an assessment of GST with respect to the supply calculated on the fair market value of the single unit complexes at 1967 Englemann, 1933 Englemann and 1948 Englemann.
-
4,294.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Lesiuk - 2003 FCA 3 - 2003-01-08
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsIs it fair to say that they can fall by the wayside so that we can protect the other three examples you've given? [...] There were in fact a great deal of worrying about that and a great deal of looking at other aspects, other programs, to try and find some way of bringing some more help. [...] I believe it is fair to say, on a careful reading of his decision, that he combined it with gender to form one analogous ground: women in a parental status.
-
4,295.
Animal Alliance of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General) - 1999-05-13
Federal Court DecisionsPour ce faire, on prolongera les périodes de chasse (ex. au printemps ou au début de l"automne, en dehors des dates de la saison de chasse régulière). [...] Thus, a good deal of urgency attached to the disposition of this application. [...] [35] Dealing with the interpretation of conventions themselves, Driedger continues at page 398:
-
4,296.
Singh v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2023 FC 743 - 2023-05-26
Federal Court DecisionsIts role is to determine whether the process followed by the administrative decision maker was fair and offered the affected parties a right to be heard as well as a full and fair chance to know and respond to the case against them. [...] The reviewing court owes no deference to the decision maker when considering issues of procedural fairness. [...] I am satisfied that, when all of Mr. Singh’s evidence is considered and the RAD’s Decision is looked in its entirety, the record is certainly sufficient to demonstrate a reasonable probability that the outcome of the Decision would have been different, but for Ms. Cheema’s incompetence in dealing with Mr. Singh’s case.
-
4,297.
Chandidas v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2013 FC 257 - 2013-03-08
Federal Court DecisionsShe adopts the position that when dealing with matters of procedural fairness, the overriding concern with respect to the disclosure of evidence is whether the document, opinion, or report is one of which the individual is aware or deemed to be aware: [...] The principle of those cases, generally stated, is that the duty of fairness requires disclosure of a document, report or opinion, if it is required to provide the individual with a meaningful opportunity to fully and fairly present her case to the decision maker. [...] [28] In my view, the failure to disclose the publicly available RIR is not a breach of procedural fairness.
-
4,298.
Difederico v. Amazon.com, Inc. - 2021 FC 311 - 2021-04-15
Federal Court DecisionsIs the LFA fair and reasonable to current and prospective class members as a group? [...] (5) Is the LFA fair and reasonable to current and prospective class members as a group? [...] [101] Unfortunately, the Quebec Superior Court may not deal with this issue for a considerable period of time.
-
4,299.
United States Steel Corporation v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2011 FCA 176 - 2011-05-25
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[79] Accordingly, it can be seen that a fair hearing in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice in the context of subsection 2(e) of the Bill of Rights is synonymous with the concept of natural justice and procedural fairness. [...] [84] Nor does U.S. Steel present any argument that would suggest that the Federal Court Rules, which deal with the conduct of applications, would be inadequate to satisfy the requirements of subsection 2(e). [...] In that case, Gonthier J. called the right to know the scope of the law “a substantive aspect to fair notice” (para. 46).
-
4,300.
Ebongole v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2023 FC 493 - 2023-04-06
Federal Court DecisionsB. Procedural fairness [21] Questions of procedural fairness are reviewed on the correctness standard: Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Khosa, 2009 SCC 12, per Binnie J at para 43. [...] [22] I also understand from the Supreme Court of Canada’s teaching in Vavilov at paragraph 23 that the standard of review for procedural fairness is correctness: [...] In addition, it is well established that PRRA officers are not required to deal with every detail of every submission.