11,315 result(s)
-
4,351.
Guydos v. Canada Post Corporation - 2012 FC 1001 - 2012-08-17
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, pursuant to s. 41(1)(e) of the Act, it decided not to deal with the allegations which occurred prior to 2008. [...] 41. (1) Subject to section 40, the Commission shall deal with any complaint filed with it unless in respect of that complaint it appears to the Commission that [...] [29] Where an issue of procedural fairness or a question of law is brought to the Court’s attention, the Commission is not to be afforded deference.
-
4,352.
Dheenshaw v. MNR - 2003 TCC 490 - 2003-07-18
Tax Court of Canada Judgmentsor intervenor - during the period from May 15 to November 30, 2001 was not insurable because he and the payor were not dealing with each other at arm's length and the Minister was not satisfied they would have entered into a substantially similar contract of employment had they been dealing with each other at arm's length. [...] Prior to 2001, he had not been responsible for management and was not required to deal with wholesalers. [...] It may well be fair considering the extensive hours needed during the summer months and the various duties that must be performed including supervision of employees during the busy picking seasons of different crops.
-
4,353.
TrueHope Nutritional Support Limited v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2010 FC 63 - 2010-01-20
Federal Court Decisions3. (1) Il est interdit de faire, auprès du grand public, la publicité d’un aliment, d’une drogue, [...] this discriminatory regulation is proof that it cannot be administered equitably or fairly. [...] [44] To deal with user telephone complaints, Health Canada set up a 1-800 Crisis Line.
-
4,354.
Valdez v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2022 FC 933 - 2022-06-22
Federal Court DecisionsOn these facts, because the Applicant’s 15-month sentence is over the 6-month bar, he is not entitled to go to the Immigration Appeal Division (“IAD”) and would only be entitled to go to the ID. Further argument was that in Lin, the Court was dealing with a misrepresentation, so the Applicant had the opportunity to present [...] [11] None of the exceptions are met in this case, as the ID is available and the FCA has said that: “The appellants in file A-279-19 point to the importance of the issues they raise and issues of jurisdiction and procedural fairness, but, as C.B. Powell tells us, these alone do not constitute exception circumstances” (Lin [...] I find that issues of jurisdiction and procedural fairness are at least as important issues as the Applicant arguing that they are not able to have his personal circumstances reviewed at the ID level.
-
4,355.
Jeon v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2019 FC 1429 - 2019-11-15
Federal Court DecisionsWhether the fact that part of the audio recording of the hearing is missing amounts to a breach of procedural fairness. [...] Whether the Panel unreasonably failed to deal with the Applicants’ fear of discrimination amounting to persecution on their return to South Korea. [...] There is no doubt that the Panel understood her explanation because it was rejected in the Decision on the basis that she was responsible for the contents of her PIF. For this reason, I am not persuaded that the loss of the audio recording led to a breach of procedural fairness.
-
4,356.
Gill v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 452 - 2015-04-10
Federal Court Decisions[7] The issues of unreasonableness and unfairness are related, so I will deal with them together. [...] [9] In my view, the officer treated Ms Gill fairly and rendered a reasonable decision. [...] [12] Similarly, on the issue of fairness, Ms Gill was made aware of the numerous concerns about her application.
-
4,357.
McDowell v. The Queen - 2012 TCC 244 - 2012-07-10
Tax Court of Canada Judgments“small business corporation”, at any particular time, means, subject to subsection 110.6(15), a particular corporation that is a Canadian-controlled private corporation all or substantially all of the fair market value of the assets of which at that time is attributable to assets that are [...] including, for the purpose of paragraph 39(1)(c), a corporation that was at any time in the 12 months preceding that time a small business corporation, and, for the purpose of this definition, the fair market value of a net income stabilization account shall be deemed to be nil; [...] Accordingly, the judicial authorities dealing with a temporary cessation of business do not apply to the facts of this case.
-
4,358.
Ghanoum v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 947 - 2011-07-28
Federal Court Decisionsa. a lack of procedural fairness; and b. the decision does not meet the reasonableness standard of review as described in Dunsmuir v New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9, [2008] 1 SCR 190. [...] However, I do not consider that decision helpful in that it deals with a situation in which one could not have raised the lack of procedural fairness until receipt of the decision.
-
4,359.
Ménard v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2007 FCA 191 - 2007-05-15
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsThis complaint alleged that the union breached its duty of fair representation when it refused to apply for judicial review of the arbitral award issued September 22, 2004, which upheld his dismissal by the Canada Post Corporation. [...] expenses to represent me, or that the Court restore the situation that existed before my unlawful dismissal by setting aside the dismissal and reinstating me in my position with full compensation or that the Court make any other order that it deems appropriate and fair, having regard to the circumstances of this case; and [...] [4] We explained to the applicant that our Court does not have jurisdiction to grant the relief sought in paragraph (b) since the application for judicial review deals with the legality of the Board’s decision with respect to the union’s duty of representation.
-
4,360.
Penn West Petroleum Ltd. v. The Queen - 2006 TCC 82 - 2006-02-10
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsMR. SOFTLEY: Well, Mr. Crump, I don't know, in fairness to the witness, I don't know how you can ask the question that divorces the provisions of the agreement that are particular to the circumstances of that agreement and the parties of that agreement from the facts and circumstances of that agreement. [...] I think, with respect, that the witness has answered as fairly as he should be expected to. [...] Where two or more members of a partnership who are not dealing with each other at arm's length agree to share any income or loss of the partnership of any other amount in respect of any activity of the partnership that is relevant to the computation of the income or taxable income of those members and the share of any such
-
4,361.
Kaya v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2002 FCT 723 - 2002-06-27
Federal Court DecisionsThe first issue raised is whether the hearing was in breach of procedural fairness as a result of an incompetent interpreter. [...] • [5] The right to an interpreter is part of the duty of fairness and is a right that also is enshrined in s.14 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982. [...] The proper translation for these words would be "dealing with people".
-
4,362.
Gurschii v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001 FCT 1044 - 2001-09-24
Federal Court DecisionsThe Presiding Member attempted to deal with procedural issues as fairly as possible for an expeditious hearing. [...] As a practical matter, he had to make comments which may have sounded imperative but his duty was to ensure that the hearings be conducted in a fair and expeditious manner.
-
4,363.
Bermudez v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001 FCT 1112 - 2001-06-08
Federal Court Decisions[4] For the applicants, counsel responded on June 27, 2000, urging that the Court had determined on the facts of the case that the applicant had been denied fairness in the proceeding by the panel's decision and this, in counsel's view, was determinative of the matter, whether or not this Court was right in its assessment [...] [5] There followed correspondence from one counsel and response by the other which discussed the evolution of international criminal law and the jurisdiction of courts to deal with such matters. [...] First, I accept the submission on behalf of the applicants that my decision of June 13, 2000 was based upon two findings, the first being that in the circumstances the CRDD failed in its duty of fairness owed to the applicants when, although there was notice that Article 1(F)(A) was in issue, no notice was given that the
-
4,364.
Kim v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001 FCT 249 - 2001-03-27
Federal Court Decisions[4] The parent applicants state that they will be detained in jail in Korea under inhumane conditions pending their trial on the criminal charges which deal with NSF cheques and other debts of the parents which resulted from the failure of their business. [...] 4. Whether the immigration officer breached the duty of fairness in reaching negative credibility conclusions without having interviewed Mr. And Ms. Kim, and in concluding that they were criminals who had fled the justice in Korea without giving the Kims an opportunity to reply? [...] 5. Whether the immigration officer breached the duty of fairness by obtaining a second negative risk assessment specific to these applicants and relying on it without providing the applicants with notice of its contents and an opportunity to answer it?
-
4,365.
Mangat v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2000-08-23
Federal Court Decisions[2] The applicant asserts he was denied the right to a fair hearing due to the incompetence of the interpreter. [...] [13] In the present case, I am satisfied the applicant understood the proceedings and that the quality of the interpretation did not compromise the fairness of the hearing. [...] Accordingly, it is not necessary to deal with counsel for the respondent"s arguments concerning the failure of the applicant to raise the question of the competency of the interpreter at the hearing or the applicant"s failure to establish that he was prejudiced in any way due to the quality of the interpretation.
-
4,366.
Velupillai v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2000-08-18
Federal Court Decisions[6] The applicant alleges that I failed to deal with or overlooked the decision rendered by the Federal Court of Appeal in Haghighi v. Canada (M.C.I.), which was rendered on June 12, 2000, three days prior to my order rendered on June 15, 2000. [...] [8] As it was clearly pointed out by counsel for the respondent in the case law, Rule 397 concerns oversight and omission on the part of the Court and not a failure on the part of a party; in the case at bar, I am convinced that both parties were fair with the Court and they presented their arguments in light of the case [...] I would answer the certified question as follows: it was a breach of the duty of fairness for the immigration officer, prior to her decision, to have failed to inform the respondent of the content of the PCDO"s risk assessment, with which she had concurred, and to give him a reasonable opportunity to attempt to identify
-
4,367.
Riverin v. Canada - 1999-05-28
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions(c) a person with whom he was not dealing at arm"s length, the following rules apply: [...] (i) the amount, if any, by which the fair market value of the property at the time it was transferred exceeds the fair market value at that time of the consideration given for the property, and
-
4,368.
Vigneau v. M.N.R. - 1998-09-25
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[1] This is an appeal from a determination dated January 8, 1998 that the appellant's employment by her daughter Linda Vigneau during the periods from May 13 to August 3, 1996 and from May 26 to August 30, 1997 was not insurable employment because she and her daughter were not dealing with each other at arm’s length. [...] The remuneration agreed on between the parties was fair, reasonable and appropriate. [...] Genuine work was done; a fair and reasonable salary was paid; and it all took place in circumstances in which the payer had the power to control the quality of the work done.
-
4,369.
Soucy v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2023 FC 723 - 2023-05-24
Federal Court DecisionsI note that in the section dealing with validation of an application or benefits, the following guidance is provided: [...] • [43]Although the Applicant did not directly raise any issue of procedural fairness, this argument “hints” at a breach of procedural fairness. [...] • [56]I am satisfied that the process followed by the CRA respected the procedural fairness owed to the Applicant.
-
4,370.
Tandi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 1413 - 2021-12-14
Federal Court Decisionswhether the RAD violated procedural fairness principles by not providing Mr. Tandi sufficient time to find a counsel to ensure a fair representation; [...] As to the procedural fairness issue, this Court has to determine whether the decision-making process was fair in regard to all the circumstances (Canadian Pacific Railway Company v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FCA 69 at paras 33-56). [...] A. The RAD did not violate procedural fairness principles [17] Mr. Tandi submits that he was denied procedural fairness at the RAD hearing because he was not provided with sufficient time to find a counsel to ensure a fair representation although the RAD had an obligation, given his age, the complexity of the issues and the
-
4,371.
Bakare v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2017 FC 267 - 2017-03-08
Federal Court DecisionsThe Applicant then contacted the local police for assistance in dealing with the Ogboni, but the police refused to help because it was a cultural matter and told him he should resolve the matter with the cult. [...] [15] The standard of review for questions of procedural fairness is correctness (Mission Institution v Khela, 2014 SCC 24 at para 79, [2014] 1 SCR 502; Khosa at para 43). [...] The RAD’s decision in this case was a reasonable one rendered without any denial of procedural fairness.
-
4,372.
Tareen v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2013 FC 35 - 2013-01-16
Federal Court DecisionsAlleged breaches of procedural fairness are decided on a correctness standard. [...] By way of background, our client has been obliged to travel to Pakistan to deal with pressing personal matters, including divorce proceedings which have been initiated in that country. [...] As there has been no breach to procedural fairness, I would have to be satisfied that the refusal to reopen the file is unreasonable.
-
4,373.
Mosilhy v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2007 FC 1302 - 2007-12-12
Federal Court DecisionsA. Did the panel member’s actions at the hearing infringe the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness? [...] A. Did panel member’s actions at hearing infringe rules of natural justice and procedural fairness? [...] [26] Although during the hearing the member showed some frustration concerning the applicant, and sometimes lacked patience in dealing with him, the transcript also indicated that the applicant did not make the panel member’s task an easy one.
-
4,374.
Osazuma v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2007 FC 1145 - 2007-11-05
Federal Court Decisions[15] The applicant also submitted that the officer breached the duty of procedural fairness on three grounds. [...] Breaches of procedural fairness are subject to judicial review on the standard of correctness. [...] [31] Because of my finding on this issue, I need not deal with the other issues.
-
4,375.
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Durrer - 2005 FC 1064 - 2005-08-08
Federal Court Decisions1. Did the Commission's failure to provide the CIBC with written reasons violate its right to procedural fairness? [...] In those cases, the Court was dealing with the standard of review applicable to a Commission decision to dismiss a complaint made under s. 44(3)(b) rather than a decision to refer a complaint to an inquiry made pursuant to s. 44(3)(a). [...] Any failure to provide further reasons was not a breach of procedural fairness.