11,315 result(s)
-
4,451.
Holway v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2006 FC 309 - 2006-03-09
Federal Court DecisionsThe Officer was not obliged by a duty of fairness to advise him of this option. [...] Therefore, in my view, the Officer did not breach the duty of fairness. [...] [50] In my opinion, there was no failure to exercise her discretion, and no breach of fairness on this ground.
-
4,452.
Leong v. Canada (Solicitor General) - 2004 FC 1126 - 2004-08-12
Federal Court Decisions[16] MacGuigan J. further noted at p. 40 in respect of procedural fairness regarding the decision to defer: [...] No procedural rule of fairness was breached by not allowing counsel to make submissions before the referral was made. [...] Rather the Act sets out specific procedures for dealing with them in ss. 25, and 112 respectively.
-
4,453.
Mattina v. Canada (National Revenue) - 2024 FC 1210 - 2024-07-30
Federal Court DecisionsThe other forms of relief, premised upon allegations of procedural fairness, are vague and unsubstantiated, as will be discussed below. [...] This Court therefore has no jurisdiction to deal with the Reassessments with respect to the Applicant’s grounds regarding the Minister acting with all due dispatch, pursuant to section 18.5 of the Act. [...] In my view, I do not find that the facts plead, assumed as true, form grounds for a substantiated argument about procedural fairness.
-
4,454.
Popoola v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2022 FC 555 - 2022-04-19
Federal Court DecisionsThe duty of procedural fairness is context-specific, flexible and variable: Vavilov, above at para 77. [...] In sum, the focus of the reviewing court is whether the process was fair and just. [...] (2) Procedural Fairness [17] I am satisfied that procedural fairness was not breached in the applicable circumstances.
-
4,455.
Papouchine v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FC 1138 - 2018-11-16
Federal Court DecisionsDid the General Division commit a breach of procedural fairness or fail to follow the requirements of natural justice? [...] It is not clear to me where any breach of procedural fairness took place. [...] [35] Again, I find that there were no incorrect findings in the Decision regarding the fact that the Applicant’s procedural fairness rights were respected by the General Division.
-
4,456.
Creelman v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FC 507 - 2018-05-14
Federal Court DecisionsAccording to s 12 of CD-081 – Offender Complaints, grievances dealing with claims of discrimination are to be rendered within 60 working days. [...] Delay in and of itself is not a ground for a breach of procedural fairness. [...] As a result, I find that the Applicant’s rights to procedural fairness were not breached.
-
4,457.
Song v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 141 - 2015-02-04
Federal Court Decisions3. Did the Officer breach the duty of procedural fairness in failing to provide the Applicant with an opportunity to respond to his or her concerns? [...] (2) Procedural Fairness [19] The Applicant says that the Officer breached the duty of procedural fairness by failing to provide the Applicant with an opportunity to address the Officer’s concerns. [...] This leaves the Court to deal with unreasonableness and breach of procedural fairness with regard to the Decision on NOC 0621 – Front Store Manager.
-
4,458.
Chaytor v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2011 FC 501 - 2011-04-29
Federal Court Decisions[20] The second issue, as stated above, raises an issue of procedural fairness and is reviewable on the standard of correctness. [...] [33] I am satisfied that no breach of procedural fairness occurred, as alleged by the Applicant. [...] The majority’s failure to properly deal with the evidence with respect to these two issues could have affected its assessment of the medical evidence and ultimately, the determination of the appeal.
-
4,459.
Lalane v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2009 FC 5 - 2009-01-05
Federal Court DecisionsThe application for protection, by contrast, is meant to deal with an allegation of personal risk . . . [...] Fairness requires that documents, reports, or opinions of which the applicant is not aware, nor deemed to be aware, must be disclosed. [...] 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.
-
4,460.
Seiffert v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 1072 - 2005-08-05
Federal Court Decisions[...] Natural justice and procedural fairness 1.10. Decision-maker [...] Depending on the nature of the decision, a fairly high degree of procedural fairness is required. [...] 1.25. Deal with each case on individual basis Examine each case on an individual basis.
-
4,461.
Dokmajian v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2003 FCT 85 - 2003-01-28
Federal Court DecisionsIt appears that the duty of fairness owed on a danger opinion is no longer minimal as the decision in Williams suggested, and given the decision of the Court of Appeal in Bhagwandass, in my opinion procedural fairness, in the circumstances of this case, requires that the decision in question be based on reasons that stand [...] held that failure to provide reasons for a decision under subsection 70(5) of the Immigration Act does not constitute breach of procedural fairness, it seems to me that the decisions in Baker, supra, and Bhagwandass, supra, support the assertion that failure to provide reasons constitutes a breach of procedural fairness. [...] There are two references, which I deal with in turn. [26] The first reference is:
-
4,462.
Richardson v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2023 FC 548 - 2023-04-14
Federal Court Decisions[21] It is trite law that the duty of procedural fairness includes the right to be heard. [...] [31] Given my conclusion regarding the right to be heard, it is unnecessary to deal with the reasonableness issue. [...] [33] In my view, the CRA’s approach to Mr. Richardson’s concerns lacked procedural fairness.
-
4,463.
Li v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 754 - 2020-07-09
Federal Court DecisionsIn considering issues of procedural fairness, the ultimate question to be answered by a reviewing Court is whether the Applicant knew the case to be met and had a full and fair chance to respond: Canadian Pacific Railway Company v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FCA 69 at paragraph 56. [...] The Fairness Guidelines provide high-level information regarding the right to be heard and other procedural matters. [...] The Applicants rely on Kanthasamy for the principle that the Best Interests of the Child [BIOC] must be ““well identified and defined” and examined “with a great deal of attention” in light of all the evidence.”
-
4,464.
Djerroud v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2007 FC 981 - 2007-10-01
Federal Court Decisions1. Did the Officer breach the duty of fairness owed to the applicant when assessing his H&C application? [...] d) he had control of other factors that delayed his removal from Canada, such as the necessity of dealing with his sentence for fraud and the submission of his application for spousal sponsorship; [...] [29] The finding that the applicant’s criminal record was not used by the Officer in reaching the decision also answers the claim that the Officer breached the duty of fairness by failing to accord the applicant fair notice.
-
4,465.
Yodjeu Ntemde v. Canada - 2018 FC 410 - 2018-04-16
Federal Court Decisions[50] These principles are interconnected and all speak to whether summary judgment will provide a fair and just adjudication. [...] On October 21, 2013, the IAD determined that it had no jurisdiction for dealing with such a complaint. [...] [112] It is not that the stage of the process that deals specifically with the permanent residence application is useless.
-
4,466.
Hupacasath First Nation v. Canada (Foreign Affairs) - 2013 FC 900 - 2013-08-26
Federal Court Decisions[88] In addition to the foregoing general submissions, HFN makes various specific submissions with respect to Articles 4 and 10 of the CCFIPPA, which deal with the minimum standard of treatment to be accorded to Chinese investors, and expropriation, respectively. [...] The arbitral panel proceeded to find that this standard “provides for the fair and equitable treatment of alien investors within the confines of reasonableness” (Merrill & Ring, above, at para 213). [...] (See also Margaret Clare Ryan, “Glamis Gold, Ltd v The United States and the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard”, (2011) 56:4 McGill LJ 919 at 957).
-
4,467.
Murphy v. Compagnie Amway Canada - 2011 FC 1341 - 2011-11-23
Federal Court Decisions(a) the agreement deals with only some of the matters in respect of which the proceeding was commenced; and [...] (i) would fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class, [...] (a) the agreement deals with only some of the matters in respect of which the proceeding was commenced; and
-
4,468.
Dupre v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2007 FC 1177 - 2007-11-13
Federal Court DecisionsI have no jurisdiction, on judicial review, to deal with the matter of contravention. [...] (3) L’agent peut faire ouvrir en sa présence un envoi pesant au plus trente grammes par le destinataire, l’expéditeur ou la personne autorisée par ce dernier. [...] 19. L’agent peut requérir main-forte pour se faire assister dans l’exercice des pouvoirs de fouille, de rétention ou de saisie que lui confère la présente partie.
-
4,469.
Visions Electronics Limited Partnership (Visions Electronics) v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2021 FC 478 - 2021-05-20
Federal Court DecisionsHere any level of procedural fairness owed to the Applicant is low and was met. [...] At issue was whether the decision was procedurally fair and reasonable. [...] I am also satisfied that ECCC’s decision was reasonable and procedurally fair.
-
4,470.
Almrei v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 1645 - 2005-12-05
Federal Court Decisions[1] This case deals with the detention of an individual as a result of a "security certificate". [...] Is that fair? A. That's fair. Q. In trying to predict his future behaviour, which is really what this is all about, one looks to the past to see what happened in the past. [...] (c) the judge shall deal with all matters as informally and expeditiously as the circumstances and considerations of fairness and natural justice permit;
-
4,471.
Zhao v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2019 FC 1593 - 2019-12-11
Federal Court Decisions[18] Whether a decision is procedurally fair must be determined on a case-by-case basis. [...] To the contrary, the Applicants had a fair and just process and I have no hesitation to conclude that they knew the case they had to meet and had a full and fair chance to respond. [...] In all respects, the RAD met all procedural fairness requirements in dealing with the Applicants’ submissions.
-
4,472.
Navaratnam v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 274 - 2015-03-05
Federal Court Decisions[27] Second, the respondent argues the hearing met the requirements of procedural fairness and the applicants participated meaningfully and presented their case fairly. [...] C. Issue 3 - Did the Board breach procedural fairness? [34] I will deal with the applicants’ assertions on procedural fairness in three parts: first, on the timeline of the refugee claim, second, on the hearing process, and third, on the adequacy of reasons. [...] Therefore, the hearing was fair and the Board’s conduct did not breach procedural fairness.
-
4,473.
Canada (Industry) v. Canada (Information Commissioner) - 2007 FCA 212 - 2007-06-01
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[...] 4(1) Sous réserve des autres dispositions de la présente loi mais nonobstant toute autre loi fédérale, ont droit à l’accès aux documents relevant d’une institution fédérale et peuvent se les faire communiquer sur demande : [...] First, by their very nature they are somewhat general, since they deal with the whole body of government information, and the specific provisions contained in individual pieces of legislation are crafted to deal with the particular problems associated with that legislation and therefore they are more precise. [...] This could be taken to indicate that, in the context of legislation dealing with access to and restrictions on information, the availability of information to “the public” is not the same as its availability to “the general public”.
-
4,474.
Sawridge First Nation v. Canada - 2006 FC 1467 - 2006-12-07
Federal Court DecisionsFinally, the Plaintiffs say that the will-says for all five of the witnesses are now compliant with previous orders of the Court dealing with the form and content of will-says. [...] Hence, it is only fair that the Plaintiffs should be allowed to draw this to the attention of the Court and, after full argument, seek the consent of the Court to lead that evidence. [...] That would be neither fair, expeditious, nor cost-efficient and those are the guidelines by which I, as Case Management judge, must be guided.
-
4,475.
Omar v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2023 FC 1334 - 2023-10-05
Federal Court DecisionsI deal with these two issues in my analysis below. [8] The determinative issue on the merits of this application for judicial review is whether the RPD erred in vacating the Applicant’s refugee status. [...] He asserts that the panel breached procedural fairness in failing to deal with this request. [...] In fairness, the Respondent conceded that the Goncalves Affidavit is not admissible to address the reasonableness of the RPD’s decision.