11,315 result(s)
-
7,001.
Grand River Enterprises Six Nations Ltd. v. Canada - 2011 FCA 121 - 2011-03-31
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions95. (1) La personne interrogée au préalable répond, soit au mieux de sa connaissance directe, soit des renseignements qu’elle tient pour véridiques, aux questions pertinentes à une question en litige ou aux questions qui peuvent, aux termes du paragraphe (3), faire l’objet de l’interrogatoire préalable. [...] 34. The jurisprudence establishes that a question is relevant when there is a reasonable likelihood that it might elicit information which may directly or indirectly enable the party seeking the answer to advance its case or to damage the case of its adversary, or which fairly might lead to a train of inquiry that may [...] Accordingly, this Court should deal only with the costs of the appeal.
-
7,002.
Sandhu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2010 FC 759 - 2010-07-20
Federal Court Decisions4) Make and deal with the appointments. 5) Respond the mails received as directed by manager. [...] [23] I find the issues in this case concern the duty of procedural fairness. [...] [26] Justice Paul Crampton found in Trivedi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 422 the content of the duty of procedural fairness in the decisions of visa officers was at the low end of the spectrum.
-
7,003.
Canada (National Revenue) v. Chabot - 2010 FC 574 - 2010-05-26
Federal Court Decisionsc) obliger une personne à faire un paiement, conformément au paragraphe 224(1); [...] d) obliger une institution ou une personne visée au paragraphe 224(1.1) à faire un paiement, conformément à ce paragraphe; [...] • [25] Further, by inserting the provision in that part of the Act dealing with refunds, Parliament intended to provide for measures to be available on application by the Minister, where jeopardy is established, to ensure that such refunds be retained and applied as a set-off against amounts that are under objection or
-
7,004.
Anderson v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2009 FC 1122 - 2009-11-02
Federal Court Decisions[15] As the present proceeding is limited to the review of the decision of the Board rendered in March 2009, the Court has no jurisdiction to deal with the allegations of systemic failures or with allegations concerning the services provided by the Pensions Advocates Office in 1988-1991 or any time prior to the applicant [...] [16] As to the quality of the services rendered by the Advocate in this case, the Court can only consider these submissions if the alleged “errors” amount to such an extraordinary incompetence[4] that it constitutes a breach of procedural fairness in itself, such that these errors impacted on the [...] [19] The Court cannot find a breach of procedural fairness here. In fact, there is no evidence that the Advocate’s services were anything but appropriate in the circumstances.
-
7,005.
Odutola v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 1352 - 2008-12-05
Federal Court DecisionsI therefore conclude that the officer’s failure to put his theory before the applicant constituted a breach of procedural fairness. [...] She seeks an award of costs against Mr. Eastman personally, in the amount of $3000, due to the 93.5 hours of additional work incurred in dealing with this motion. [...] I maintain that there were points on that motion taken by the Applicant that were and remain fairly arguable”.
-
7,006.
Munganza v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 1250 - 2008-11-10
Federal Court DecisionsB. Did the Appeal Division vitiate the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness by failing to hold an oral hearing before making its decision? [...] [12] With respect to the claims relating to the applicant’s psychiatric state, there was no psychiatric report filed dealing with the sponsorship application. [...] [16] In regard to the second issue, I am of the opinion that the Appeal Division did not breach a principle of procedural fairness by failing to hold an oral hearing before making its decision.
-
7,007.
Gaz Propane Raymond (1996)Inc. v. The Queen - 2008 TCC 169 - 2008-03-26
Tax Court of Canada Judgments(c) a person with whom the person 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
-
7,008.
Tagliabue v. Canada (Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada) - 2008 FC 288 - 2008-03-03
Federal Court Decisions[9] The Applicant says that the Commission failed to conduct a fair and thorough investigation because the Ambassador was not interviewed. [...] On this issue of procedural fairness, no deference is owed. See: Canadian Union of Public Employees (C.U.P.E.) v. Ontario (Minister of Labour), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 539 at paragraph 100. [...] · A one page letter of December 31, 2004 dealing with the reasons for the Applicant’s termination.
-
7,009.
D’Souza v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 57 - 2008-01-16
Federal Court DecisionsIt is important because it deals with Colette’s bouts of depression when Sharon is away. [...] However, in this case, since Sharon, who was neither the applicant nor the sponsor, was being interviewed, procedural fairness demanded that she be shown the actual letter which casts aspersions on her. [...] [17] Apart from procedural fairness, there are other grounds to grant judicial review.
-
7,010.
Malkine v. Gagne - 2007 FC 573 - 2007-05-31
Federal Court Decisionsin the decision “regarding any alleged misrepresentation or misconduct of the Plaintiff either at the immigration interview or in any documentation supplied by him were not true and were neither factual nor inaccurate, and were reached by the said Defendant Gagné without providing procedural fairness to the Plaintiff . . . [...] associated with any criminal or associated with any organized crime in any way whatsoever, were not true, neither factual nor accurate and were reached by the said Defendant Gagné without providing procedural fairness to the Plaintiff and lacked either factual or evidentiary substance” (Statement of Claim, para. 1(c)); [...] a. A great deal of expense, trouble, time, and interruption of his business activities, as well as legal costs and other damages related to thirteen years of pursuing a futile proceeding;
-
7,011.
Lee v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2006 FC 1461 - 2006-12-05
Federal Court Decisions[2] The Applicant argues that, as he is an entrepreneur with considerable net worth, the Officer erred in law by failing to consider his ability to provide for his own health care if admitted to Canada, and, further, that the Officer breached procedural fairness by not considering his request for a temporary resident [...] II. Did the Officer breach procedural fairness by not considering the Applicant’s request for a Temporary Resident Permit? [...] In my opinion, the failure of the Officer to deal with the request constitutes an error in due process.
-
7,012.
Davitt v. The Queen - 2006 TCC 402 - 2006-07-12
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[15] The Appellant's argument that he should be permitted to make claims under the Charter as to the unfairness of the rates in the Income Tax Act, the Canada Pension Plan and the Employment Insurance scheme because, under the Charter, they are not fair or equitable to all citizens is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. [...] He, as having a particular income level, in a particular year, claims that it is not fair to tax him on a certain basis in relation to other matters. [...] [20] I have dealt with the Notices of Motion as if they had merit, as fresh notices to this Court; but over and above dealing with them on their merits, there is in my view an overarching reason why the motions should be dismissed.
-
7,013.
Kim v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2006 FC 244 - 2006-02-23
Federal Court Decisions[6] The officer states that much of the material provided deals with the family's efforts to establish and integrate into the community. [...] The applicants have also raised as a secondary issue whether the officer breached procedural fairness by relying upon the FOSS notes. [...] [8] As I have concluded that the application must succeed on the primary ground, I do not propose to analyse the procedural fairness issue.
-
7,014.
Bouasla v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 1544 - 2005-11-18
Federal Court Decisionsbecause, if section 63 of the former Act was inapplicable, the potential safeguard described in subsection 69(7) of the former Act should have been considered, or should be set aside because it was made without regard for the principles of procedural fairness, an extremely variable concept dependent on the circumstances. [...] [35] I will conclude by addressing another concept related to procedural fairness—that of legitimate expectation, as set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Reference re Canada Assistance Plan, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 525. [...] (2) to settle the issue of inclusion rather than restricting itself to dealing with exclusion.
-
7,015.
Jamil v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 758 - 2005-05-27
Federal Court DecisionsA question as to the adequacy of reasons raises an issue of procedural fairness. [...] Issues of procedural fairness are decided against a standard of correctness: Fetherston v. Attorney General, 2005 FCA 111. [...] [23] There have been a number of decisions of this Court dealing with the treatment of time served in pre-trial detention (also known as "dead time") as it relates to the two year requirement of subsection 64(2) of IRPA. Thus far, the Court has unanimously been of the view that time spent in pre-trial detention forms part
-
7,016.
Tudela-Flores v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 451 - 2005-04-06
Federal Court Decisions1. Did the Board deny the Applicant procedural fairness by denying the request for an adjournment? [...] Issue#1: Did the Board deny the Applicant procedural fairness by denying the request for an adjournment? [...] While it appears that the Board failed to follow its own rules on dealing with adjournment requests, in this case, any error is immaterial.
-
7,017.
Kovtun v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 109 - 2004-01-23
Federal Court Decisionsg) de remplir, envers les réfugiés, les obligations imposées au Canada par le droit international et de continuer à faire honneur à la tradition humanitaire du pays à l'endroit des personnes déplacées ou persécutées; [...] 6. Did the Member fail to observe a principle of natural justice, procedural fairness or other procedure that it was required by law to observe? [...] [28] In my opinion, these matters should have been addressed by the Member and his failure to deal with them appropriately renders the Decision patently unreasonable.
-
7,018.
Webster v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) - 2003 FCA 442 - 2003-11-21
Federal Court of Appeal Decisionsc) obliger une personne à faire un paiement, conformément au paragraphe 224(1); [...] d) obliger une institution ou une personne visée au paragraphe 224(1.1) à faire un paiement, conformément à ce paragraphe; [...] [9] An agreement under subsection (5), however, only deals with collection.
-
7,019.
Cheung v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2003 FCT 710 - 2003-06-05
Federal Court Decisions[11] Various issues were raised in the written materials concerning the form of affidavit sworn by the Applicant and whether the Respondent had breached the duty of fairness by not providing reasons for the decision in writing. [...] [20] First, the SIO did not rely upon an irrelevant consideration by considering the Applicant's past dealings with CIC. While it is not a factor enumerated in Section 4.3, this does not mean that the SIO could not take it into account. [...] The situation in Dee, supra, was complicated by a denial of natural justice and procedural fairness, as well as the Minister's failure to comply with an earlier Court order.
-
7,020.
Agot v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2003 FCT 436 - 2003-04-15
Federal Court DecisionsFirst, the immigration officer breached the duty of procedural fairness in failing to follow the ministerial guidelines as outlined in the Immigration Manual: Inland Processing (IP), Chapter IP 5: Immigrant Applications in Canada Made on Humanitarian or Compassionate (H & C) Grounds. [...] . Previous dealings with the Department that might be relevant. For example, a previous marriage of convenience, enforcement action, refused immigration applications, or misrepresentation. [...] That being said, an allegation that an immigration officer failed to conform to the guidelines by not specifically referring to a favourable sponsorship application, without more, will not sustain an argument of breach of procedural fairness.
-
7,021.
Quantz v. The Queen - 2002-12-09
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsThe fairness policy of the Agency states that these matters will be taken into account upon requests for fairness. [...] She was following the reasoning of Bowman J. in Pillar Oilfield v. Canada[2] wherein he laid the foundation for a due diligence defence dealing with a similar penalty under section 280 of the Excise Tax Act. He stated:
-
7,022.
Cox v. The Queen - 2002-03-19
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsAlthough I set out a fairly detailed psychological profile of Mr. Cox I would not say that it leads conclusively to a finding of low intelligence. [...] [17] I do not criticize Mr. Michaud for making his estimates on the basis of StatsCan norms but we are dealing here with a person who is entirely abnormal. [...] I cannot justify ignoring the gifts completely because I find as a fact that the girlfriend was fairly generous with the appellant, although the extent of her largesse is hard to quantify.
-
7,023.
Bell v. Canada - 2002 FCA 7 - 2002-01-10
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[3] It appears that for income tax purposes, the book value of the Rosemount had been written down to its fair market value and the resulting loss allocated to the partners. [...] There was nothing in the pleadings or any of the Crown's admissions to suggest or establish that the co-owners could not or would not deal with their separate interests as they saw fit. [...] En l'espèce, non seulement le juge s'est-il permis de faire état de faits qui n'étaient pas en preuve, mais il s'est de plus servi du dossier comme prétexte pour régler avec le requérant et ses procureurs, ex parte, des comptes qu'il avait de toute évidence retenus d'une affaire antérieure.
-
7,024.
Yin v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001 FCT 661 - 2001-06-15
Federal Court Decisions[10] Finally, the applicant states that the duty of fairness required the visa officer to advise him of her concerns in order to allow him an opportunity to respond before making a decision. [...] . . . d) soit ne se conforment pas aux conditions prévues à la présente loi et à ses règlements ou aux mesures ou instructions qui en procèdent, soit ne peuvent le faire. [...] I will, however, deal with the alleged error. [24] There is no doubt that the applicant is entitled to be assessed in his intended occupation.
-
7,025.
Bordage v. Cloutier - 2000-11-30
Federal Court Decisions[16] Section 4(g) of the Act lays down the rule that "decisions [of the Service shall] be made in a forthright and fair manner, with access by the offender to an effective grievance procedure". [...] In accordance with the regulations implementing s. 96(u), s. 90 of the Act sets out a fair and expeditious procedure for resolving grievances on matters within the Commissioner's jurisdiction, and under s. 91 of the said Act every offender shall have complete access to the offender grievance procedure without negative [...] Judicial review does not deal with the merits and a favourable result to an inmate would simply return the matter for redetermination to the tribunal appealed from.