Advanced Search

Bharaj v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 1462 - 2005-10-27

1. The Visa Officer breached the principles of fairness by: i. Not providing sufficient reasons for refusal.   [...]  [O]ne may conclude that this [duty of fairness] does not arise merely because the visa officer has not been convinced, after weighing the evidence, that the application is well founded.   [...]  [6] The Respondent submits that the Visa Officer assessed the Applicant's permanent resident application fairly and reasonably.

Vogan v. Canada (Public Service Commission) - 2005 FC 525 - 2005-04-19

In any event, Mr. Vogan fairly conceded that this question was not squarely before the Recourse Branch, as he had not thought of it when he made his complaint.   [...]  Mr. Vogan has presented a good deal of material that he submits was before the decision-maker, but there is no proper evidence before me that it was submitted to and improperly rejected by the Board.   [...]  Indeed, the fact that Ms. Bryant sought to have him clarify his experience indicates to me that, rather than attempting to screen the applicant out, every reasonable effort was being made to screen him in so he could fairly compete for the position.

Pigg v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2003 FCT 426 - 2003-04-11

3. Was procedural fairness denied because the medical officers failed to assess supporting documentation beyond the Applicant's economic factors and Steve's medical condition?   [...]  Issue #3: Was procedural fairness denied because the medical officers failed to assess supporting documentation beyond the Applicant's economic factors and Steve's medical condition?   [...]  I agree that the Federal Court of Appeal in Deol, supra, on the facts of that case, was dealing with the matter of medical costs.

Umba v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001 FCT 582 - 2001-06-04

For all these reasons, the plaintiffs argued that the exclusion decisions contravened the fundamental principles of procedural fairness.   [...]  The purpose of the port of entry interview was, as I have already observed, to aid in the processing of the appellant's application for entry and to determine the appropriate procedures which should be invoked in order to deal with his application for Convention refugee status.   [...]  Under the circumstances of the present case, therefore, I am of the view that fairness did not require that the applicant be advised of the nature and effect of the secondary examination.

International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. Cairns - 2000-01-18

of negotiations between a union and an employer to determine whether the union has discharged its duty of fair representation to its members under section 37 of the Code.   [...]  Further to that point, the parties cited conflicting decisions of the predecessor to the Board for the proposition that section 37 of the Code does not permit the Board to deal with a complaint that arises from the open-period negotiations of a collective agreement.   [...]  [11] To demonstrate that VIA was not given fair notice that the Board might find that it had

Stringer v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2013 FC 735 - 2013-07-02

First, the Supreme Court has made clear that reasonableness is appropriate for dealing with questions of facts and questions dealing with legal issues that cannot be easily separated from the factual issues.   [...]  c) faire prêter serment et recevoir les affirmations solennelles; d) accepter des éléments de preuve, qu’ils soient admissibles ou non en justice;   [...]  228. (1) L’arbitre de grief donne à chaque partie au grief l’occasion de se faire entendre.

Rodrigue v. Canada - 2013 FCA 22 - 2013-02-06

[10] Subsection 27(1.1) of the Federal Courts Act deals with appeals from Tax Court of Canada judgments issued under that court’s general procedure.   [...]  [18] Even though decisions dealing with procedural issues or the conduct of a proceeding often deal with questions of law regarding the proceeding in question, they are not judgments on a question of law determined before trial within the meaning of paragraph 27(1.1)(b) of the Federal Courts Act, as long as they are not   [...]  The underlying consideration in exercising this discretion is whether it is fair and reasonable to extend the time in the light of all the circumstances.

Canada (National Revenue) v. Kocsis - 2009 FC 1216 - 2009-11-26

[14] Unfortunately, the history here is one of a failure by Mr. Kocsis to deal with the Minister and with the Court Orders in a responsible and wholly responsive way.   [...]  He produced several photographs depicting black mould within the exterior wall cavities of the office and fairly extensive renovations to those areas.   [...]  [22] I intend to deal with the issues of sentencing and costs by way of a video-conference hearing.

Dhanani v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 169 - 2005-02-03

These Divisions deal with inadmissibility, loss of status and removal.   [...]  [20] There are a number of cases which deal with equivalency of criminal offences committed in Canada, or elsewhere.   [...]  What we are really dealing with here is a mixed question of fact and law, the application of the Criminal Code to actions carried out in Texas.

Old Western Pizza Inc. v. The Queen - 2004 TCC 452 - 2004-06-22

In fairness, he probably did know that the invoices and receipt tapes did not reflect an accurate picture but it was all that was provided.   [...]  [5] I will first deal with the ITCs. Mr. Mohammed testified that he looked at every receipt the Appellant provided and they did not add up to the amount claimed.   [...]  13 We are dealing with one of the technical requirements under a statute that is somewhat unique for its specificity.

Maheu v. IMS Health Canada - 2002 FCT 558 - 2002-05-14

Thus there is no barrier to applying Rule 416, which deals with security for costs, to the present Application, substituting applicant and respondent for plaintiff and defendant as allowed by Rule 415.   [...]  The other aspect derives from Federal Court Rules 221(1)(c) and 221(1)(f), dealing with frivolous, vexatious and abusive proceedings, which may be struck out when it is plain, obvious and beyond doubt that a claim or a defence, as the case may be, will not succeed.   [...]  [19] In the present instance the material appears to indicate that there is reason to believe that the proceeding is frivolous and vexatious in the sense that it is not fair and honest to use the process of the Court in order to extend the Act for what is very arguably an improper purpose, that of obtaining a commercial

Lopez v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2000-09-18

We have proceeded to deal with the PIF as expeditiously as available time would permit.   [...]  69.1(6) La section du statut peut, après avoir donné à l'intéressé la possibilité de se faire entendre, conclure au désistement dans les cas suivants:   [...]  That subsection deals with a claimant's obligation to provide information in a form and manner prescribed by rules made under subsection 65(1), thus incorporating by reference subsection 65(1) and the CRDD Rules.

Canada (Attorney General) v. Al Jabri - 2023 FC 40 - 2023-01-10

[144] The AGC submits that the CEA comprehensively deals with sensitive or injurious information.   [...]  This motion deals with a preliminary issue arising well before the Court’s ultimate determination of the Section 38 Application.   [...]  Protection of right to a fair trial Protection du droit à un procès équitable