11,315 result(s)
-
5,001.
Nalliah v. Canada (Solicitor General) - 2004 FC 1649 - 2004-11-24
Federal Court Decisions[2] Also before me for the purposes of this motion were five other motions dealing with the same subject matter. [...] In Mr. Nalliah's submission, while this will result in some delay, this cannot counterbalance the public interest in ensuring fair process. [...] "Such circumstances can arise if a defendant is dealing with the proposed class members in a way that undermines the integrity of the class proceeding itself."
-
5,002.
Maheu v. IMS Health Canada - 2003 FCT 1 - 2003-01-03
Federal Court Decisions... g) il y a lieu de croire que l'action est frivole ou vexatoire et que le demandeur ne détient pas au Canada des actifs suffisants pour payer les dépens s'il lui est ordonné de le faire; [...] In terms of procedure, he pointed to Division II of the Act, dealing with remedies, which provides for the filing of complaints, an investigation by the Privacy Commissioner, a report and an application to this Court for a hearing by a complainant, if dissatisfied with the report. [...] [43] Counsel points out this Schedule model code, subject to the exceptions contained in sections 7 to 9 of the Act, goes well beyond disclosing information about individuals because, except as related to paragraph 4.9 of the Schedule, all other provisions of the model code deal with systems and methods and are not
-
5,003.
Greene v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2022 FC 308 - 2022-03-04
Federal Court DecisionsThe adjudicator found the requisite level of procedural fairness was not met, rendering Mr. Greene’s discharge invalid. [...] [26] Given his conclusions on the fairness issue, the adjudicator did not address Mr. Greene’s remaining grounds of appeal. [...] [50] I note that this is the only ground the adjudicator gave for declining to deal with Mr. Greene’s arguments regarding the reasonableness of his dismissal from Depot and how it affected the RCMP’s reliance on the Depot training as part of the work force adjustment process.
-
5,004.
Lambert v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2015 FC 1236 - 2015-10-30
Federal Court DecisionsGiven that their applications are identical, they seek the same relief and their memoranda differ only marginally, this decision will deal with the three proceedings jointly, noting any differences where required. [...] The auditor was not satisfied CRA would have accepted the farm losses if they had been filed as requested in the fairness request. [...] The policy has as its underlying objective promoting certainty and finality in an area of law that deals annually with individual taxpayers’ situations and the law as it applies in those years.
-
5,005.
Sui v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2006 FC 1314 - 2006-10-30
Federal Court DecisionsHe specifies that he does not deal with other grounds of inadmissibility and said: “I am not purporting to rule on any situation other than the very specific one at issue”. [...] They should be mindful of the various objectives and provisions dealing with immigration in Canada. [...] -- la période allouée afin de permettre à l’étudiant de faire une demande de rétablissement a été portée de 30 à 90 jours
-
5,006.
Wyeth-Ayerst Canada Inc. v. Faulding Canada Inc. - 2002 FCT 969 - 2002-09-13
Federal Court DecisionsPredictability is achieved by tying the patentee to its claims; fairness is achieved by interpreting those claims in an informed and purposive way. [...] (b) Adherence to the language of the claims in turn promotes both fairness and predictability. [...] They then rely on subsection 6(6) and postulate that the presumption can be rebutted only by access to the aspect of Faulding's NDS for piperacillin that deals with the processes for making the proposed product.
-
5,007.
Canadian National Railway Company v. Casler - 2015 FC 704 - 2015-06-02
Federal Court DecisionsAt that time, the Commission decided not to deal with the Complaint until the grievance procedure had been exhausted. [...] B. Breach of the Duty of Fairness [22] As mentioned, the faded memory causing prejudice argument is coupled with a two-part breach of fairness argument with respect to the Commission’s decision-making process. [...] This case is not like others, where evidence of prejudice to the fairness of the hearing was lacking.
-
5,008.
Hassan Chauhdry v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 22 - 2011-01-11
Federal Court DecisionsIn failing to provide adequate reasons, the Visa Officer breached the duty of fairness. [...] Moreover, both affidavits fail to deal with the Applicant’s intention to enrol in a private health insurance plan in Canada as he done in the United States. [...] [47] I have reviewed the Fairness Letter and the Applicant’s response.
-
5,009.
Myers v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2007 FC 947 - 2007-09-21
Federal Court DecisionsIt was clearly a directive by Treasury Board as to how departments should deal fairly with their employees. [...] This also signals a degree of fairness that is greater than the minimum level [...] [44] For these reasons, the duty of procedural fairness owed to the applicant was breached.
-
5,010.
Charleswood Legion Non-Profit Housing v. The Queen - 1998-06-10
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIt has to be an amount that both sides would deem to be a fair price. [...] It is true that the land for the Charleswood property was bought for $1 from the Royal Canadian Legion in a situation where the parties were not dealing at arm’s length. [...] Here it is not necessary to be specific as to the actual fair market value because the Minister has used in each case as the fair market value an amount lower than the lowest possible fair market value.
-
5,011.
Gauthier v. The King - 2024 TCC 22 - 2024-02-20
Tax Court of Canada Judgments(iii) disposed of it at that later time for proceeds equal to its fair market value at that later time, and [...] (iv) immediately thereafter reacquired it at a cost equal to that fair market value; [...] [29] For one thing, the fact that paragraphs 45(1)(a) and (c) deal separately with changes from one single purpose to the other single purpose and with changes in the proportion of use for each purpose, respectively, could suggest that Parliament had planned to address these two situations separately within subsection 45(3)
-
5,012.
McLean v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2019 FC 1525 - 2019-11-29
Federal Court DecisionsIt is not for this Court to deal with these issues but the Court file is public and is available to the regulators if deemed by them necessary. [...] [19] Manuge v Canada, 2013 FC 341, established that fees are to be “fair and reasonable”. [...] The affiant’s belief that the fees are “fair and reasonable” is opinion evidence which does not assist the Court.
-
5,013.
Wenham v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2017 FC 658 - 2017-07-06
Federal Court Decisions(i) would fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class, [...] [29] The decision under review deals uniquely with Mr. Wenham’s claim and his specific circumstances. [...] Accordingly, a class proceeding in this instance would not fulfill the class proceeding objectives of judicial economy, access to justice, and a fair and efficient procedures to all parties, including the Court (see AIC Limited v Fischer, 2013 SCC 69 at para 16.)
-
5,014.
Seven Valleys Transportation Inc. v. Canada (Employment and Social Development) - 2017 FC 195 - 2017-02-16
Federal Court DecisionsThe underlying consideration, however, which, as it seems to me, must be borne in mind in dealing with any application of this kind, is whether, in the circumstances presented, to do justice between the parties calls for the grant of the extension. [...] B. Procedural Fairness [24] The Applicant claims the Officer breached procedural fairness by relying on information from an internal database and on interim guidelines without disclosing these documents. [...] [28] In light of the above, the Court finds that the Officer did not breach any procedural fairness principles in assessing the LMIA.
-
5,015.
Stoney v. Sawridge First Nation - 2013 FC 509 - 2013-05-15
Federal Court Decisions27 Although it deals specifically with Band Lists maintained in the Department, section 11 clearly distinguishes between automatic, or unconditional, entitlement to membership and conditional entitlement to membership. [...] This legislation achieves balance and rests comfortably and fairly on the principle that those persons who lost status and membership should have their status and membership restored. [...] [19] The Applicants did not challenge the reasonableness of the appeal decision but only the fairness of the process that was followed.
-
5,016.
Jensen v. The Queen - 2007 TCC 431 - 2007-12-07
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[14] I will now deal with whether the Appellant is entitled to deductions for expenses in excess of those allowed for 2001, 2002 and 2003. [...] [26] I find that the amount allocated by the appeals officer was fair. [...] [31] In her Notice of Appeal and final argument, the Appellant in essence, asked for fairness and equity.
-
5,017.
Ahamat Djalabi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2007 FC 684 - 2007-06-27
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, the principal question was whether the applicants’ right to a fair hearing before the Refugee Protection Division was observed and, in particular, whether the right to the assistance of an interpreter was observed. [...] [7] The questions raised by the questionable quality of the interpretation at a hearing as in the case at bar are closely related to the principle of procedural fairness. [...] Since that is not what was done in the case at bar, it must be concluded that the applicants did not have a fair hearing and the Court must accordingly intervene.
-
5,018.
Zhong v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 1636 - 2004-11-22
Federal Court Decisions[26] Further the Officer failed to clearly identify the criminal act for which he found the applicant inadmissible under subsection 36 (2) of the IRPA. Nor did the Officer, in his refusal letter or in his CAIPS notes deal with the double criminality requirement provided for in subsection 36(2). [...] [29] Since my above finding is determinative of this application, it is unnecessary to consider the second issue in respect to the duty of fairness. [...] The Officer's failure to inform, in the circumstances, may well have resulted in a breach of procedural fairness.
-
5,019.
Skoruk v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001 FCT 1220 - 2001-11-07
Federal Court DecisionsIn my view, in dealing with legislation of this nature, the courts should, wherever possible, avoid a narrow, technical construction, and endeavour to make effective the legislative intent as applied to the administrative scheme involved. [...] [17] The last issue is whether the visa officer breached his duty of fairness. [...] [18] In my view, in the present instance, the visa officer did not breach his duty of fairness to the Applicant.
-
5,020.
Deigan v. Canada (Attorney General) - 1997-11-12
Federal Court Decisions[14] The Applicant challenges the Adjudicator's decision on the grounds that she failed to observe the rules of procedural fairness. [...] [20] The Respondent submits that the Adjudicator conducted the hearing in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness. [...] [24] Before dealing with the issues at hand, I find it necessary to consider the appropriate standard of review of an adjudicator's decision.
-
5,021.
Safdari v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2016 FC 1357 - 2016-12-08
Federal Court Decisions[28] The Visa Officer’s procedural fairness letter gave the Principal Applicant a fair opportunity to explain the inconsistencies in his responses at the 2011 and the 2015 interviews to the question of why he had left Afghanistan. [...] [29] In his response to the procedural fairness letter, the Principal Applicant did not address these significant inconsistencies. [...] This is confirmed by the GCMS notes, which make it clear that the Principal Applicant had failed to respond adequately to the “concerns” set out in the fairness letter.
-
5,022.
Transport Desgagnés inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2015 FC 1330 - 2015-11-30
Federal Court Decisions[10] There was no formal process for dealing with claims received by the Minister; the Minister agreed to consider, on a case-by-case basis, any remission claims made by importers for the types of vessels described in the Order. [...] 3. Did the Minister breach his duties regarding the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness? [...] C. Did the Minister breach his duties regarding the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness?
-
5,023.
Wynter v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2000-07-06
Federal Court DecisionsWas the applicant denied procedural fairness? Was the grant of an exemption under subsection 9(1) of the Act relevant? [...] (b) à y demeurer, les personnes se trouvant au Canada qui font l"objet ou sont susceptibles de faire l"objet du rapport prévu au paragraphe 27(2). [...] The immigration officer"s reasons deal with the applicant"s children in two sentences; one states that they are being considered and the other states that it is up to their mother to decide what is in their best interests.
-
5,024.
Ahmed v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 793 - 2021-07-27
Federal Court Decisions[8] Mr. Ahmed appealed before the RAD and argued that the RPD erred (1) in undermining his credibility based on the BOC form contents; (2) in its breach of procedural fairness leading him to believe that the divorce certificate from Soudan was not an issue; (3) in its assessment of Mr. Ahmed’s supporting documents. [...] He notes that the RAD needs to deal separately and squarely with the evidence before coming to an overall credibility finding (citing, inter alia, Ren v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2015 FC 1402). [...] From reading the decision, I find that the RAD did deal separately and exhaustively with the two letters, and that the reasons for affording them little weight are not related to its other credibility findings.
-
5,025.
Bernard v. Canada (Revenue Agency) - 2015 FCA 263 - 2015-11-24
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsSome issues are best decided by the panel hearing the application, not by a motions judge dealing with issues on an interlocutory basis. [...] Dealing with it now will allow the hearing of the application to proceed in a more timely and orderly way. [...] [26] I note parenthetically that if the evidence of natural justice, procedural fairness, improper purpose or fraud were available at the time of the administrative proceedings, the aggrieved party would have to object and adduce the evidence supporting the objection before the administrative decision-maker.