11,312 result(s)
-
7,751.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Murray - 2019 FC 757 - 2019-05-29
Federal Court Decisionsin lower status positions and underrepresentation of visible minorities in permanent positions at the Immigration and Refugee Board (“IRB”) Toronto Regional office during the period of 12 months preceding the filing of the Complaint with the Commission was not thorough and thus constituted a breach of procedural fairness. [...] Dealing with a motion to dismiss the complaint filed by the IRB, the Tribunal found that the subject matter of Mr. Murray’s complaint had previously been adjudicated by the Public Service Staffing Tribunal [PSST] and applying the doctrines of issue estoppel and abuse of process, the Tribunal found that adjudicating the
-
7,752.
Oberlander v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FC 488 - 2018-05-07
Federal Court DecisionsThe 2008 Decision found the GIC’s conclusion that the Applicant was complicit was reasonable, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal in Oberlander v Canada (Attorney General), 2009 FCA 330, 313 DLR (4th) 378, but remitted back to the GIC to deal with the issue of “duress” – an issue raised for the first time before the [...] [16] The test for a reasonable apprehension of bias is whether a reasonable, informed person having knowledge of the facts and the context of the proceedings would think it more likely than not that a decision-maker would not decide fairly: Committee for Justice and Liberty v National Energy Board, [1978] 1 SCR 369 at 394,
-
7,753.
Alvarez v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2017 FC 1177 - 2017-12-20
Federal Court Decisions[7] Mr. Alvarez complains that the RAD breached its duty of procedural fairness by relying on ex post facto evidence of a peace accord between FARC and the Colombian government. [...] The later fact that a deal had been signed added little significance to the Applicants’ supposed risk and did not reflect a fundamental change in the general country conditions: see Zhan v Canada, 2015 FC 1031 at paras 54 to 60, 258 ACWS (3d) 160.
-
7,754.
DP World Prince Rupert Inc. v. Hanjin Vienna (Ship) - 2017 FC 761 - 2017-08-09
Federal Court DecisionsIn this motion they seek production of documentation which might show their awareness of the situation and the steps they took to deal with it. [...] [14] As is fairly common on the West Coast, draft affidavits of documents have been exchanged.
-
7,755.
Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. R. K. - 2016 FCA 272 - 2016-11-09
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions... PRESIDING MEMBER: Well no, the whole issue is sexual assault, let me deal with that. [...] PRESIDING MEMBER: So is that fair enough? COUNSEL: Absolutely. (Transcript page 1108, lines 6-36)
-
7,756.
Exeter v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2015 FCA 260 - 2015-11-23
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsIn his decision, reported at 2015 FCA 238, he held that no reasonable, fully informed person, thinking the matter through, would conclude that he would not decide the matter fairly. [...] [11] In these circumstances, it is not necessary to deal with the merits of Ms. Exeter’s claim before the Federal Court.
-
7,757.
Brunet v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 986 - 2015-08-19
Federal Court DecisionsBehaviour subsequent to the marriage: The IAD observed that the couple had a great deal of communication and contact, as established by the evidence in the form of almost daily emails and telephone calls. [...] [15] She further submits that the generally accepted factors arising from Chavez, above, for assessing the genuineness of a marriage, were not evaluated fairly, the IAD focussing on how the applicant and her spouse met.
-
7,758.
Apotex Inc. v. Allergan Inc. - 2015 FCA 137 - 2015-06-03
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsRead fairly, in light of the extensive record before the Federal Court, and in light of the fact that the Judge was alive to all of the issues and that all of his findings were supported by evidence, the reasons are adequate. [...] [7] Dealing with each asserted error, I am satisfied that: i. The Federal Court did not err in its construction of the inventive concept of the 691 patent.
-
7,759.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Horner - 2013 FC 605 - 2013-06-07
Federal Court Decisions[9] In an earlier case dealing with similar facts, the Federal Court concluded that an adjudicator had erred in granting an employee compensation because the collective agreement did not provide a specific remedy for breach of the notice requirement (Canada (Attorney General) v McKindsey, 2008 FC 73). [...] 228. (1) L’arbitre de grief donne à chaque partie au grief l’occasion de se faire entendre.
-
7,760.
Stone v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2012 FC 81 - 2012-01-19
Federal Court Decisions[2] He raises four issues of law or procedural fairness. He alleges: [...] [7] However, should I be wrong in so holding, I am prepared to deal with the issues argued.
-
7,761.
Jamieson v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2011 FCA 204 - 2011-06-14
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsAmong these conditions were provisions dealing with vacations, which stipulated that the applicant would be entitled to three weeks of paid holidays upon completing one year of service. [...] his employment and, if so, if he had demonstrated just cause pursuant to section 29 of the Act. The applicant argues that the issue of dismissal should have formed part of the Board’s or the Umpire’s considerations, and that he was denied procedural fairness by being prevented to tender evidence pertaining to this issue.
-
7,762.
Gamble v. The Queen - 2011 TCC 244 - 2011-05-04
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[9] Now dealing with clause 167(5)(b)(i)(A), the Appellant testified that through the period from the end of August 2009 to the end of August 2010, he was preoccupied with several matters. [...] Keeping one’s life work, one’s business enterprises or one’s financial stake from crumbling is a circumstance that might reasonably be attended to and relieved before circumstances can fairly be said to permit the filing of an application for an extension of time to file an appeal.
-
7,763.
Demiraj v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 161 - 2011-02-10
Federal Court Decisionsto the decision in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190, decisions of statutory decision-makers, like the Officer, are reviewable on one of two standards, either reasonableness for fact-driven conclusions and questions of mixed fact and law, or correctness for questions of law and issues of procedural fairness. [...] I am not persuaded that any of the arguments raised by the Applicants supports a finding that the Officer committed any error of law in dealing with their PRRA application.
-
7,764.
Davis v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 97 - 2011-01-27
Federal Court DecisionsJustice Boivin found that Ms. Davis had been denied procedural fairness when the PRRA Officer relied upon a document from the World Health Organization dealing with the availability of mental health care in St. Vincent, without first disclosing the document to her.
-
7,765.
Thiyagarajah v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2010 FC 1015 - 2010-10-19
Federal Court Decisions2. Did the officer breach the applicant’s right to procedural fairness by providing inadequate reasons for her decision; [...] However, the issue the applicant raises is that the officer fails to deal with all of the allegations set out above, specifically, the allegation that the applicant faces risk as a result of “his extended stay in Canada with the resulting risk of abduction and extortion.”
-
7,766.
Layte v. The Queen - 2010 TCC 281 - 2010-05-25
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsAt paragraph 4, the Court indicates that, while the law may be unfair, it is not open to the Court to make exceptions to statutory provisions on the grounds of fairness or equity and that, if the appellant considered the law unfair, his remedy lay with Parliament and not with the Court. [...] Applying that principle to the case at bar, I note that Parliament has prescribed a four-year limitation period for claiming ITCs. Presumably, the legislator felt that this period was long enough to deal with any unforeseen events that could cause a registrant to delay filing a claim for ITCs. The ETA confers no discretion
-
7,767.
Hansra v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2009 FC 230 - 2009-03-04
Federal Court Decisions[12] In regard to the more specific issue of the adequacy of reasons, this is a matter of procedural fairness to which the standard is correctness (Adu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 565). [...] [13] As this issue was argued first, I will deal with it first. The Respondent supplemented the Record by submitting an affidavit which attempted to amplify or explain the decision.
-
7,768.
Ananyan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 910 - 2008-07-30
Federal Court DecisionsProcedural fairness and natural justice are subject to the correctness standard. [...] The Court sees no need to rule on this issue, other than to note that, in general, the officer dealing with a PRRA application does not generally hold a hearing but may do so in exceptional circumstances when all the conditions set out in section 167 of the Act are met.
-
7,769.
Liu v. Matrikon inc. - 2008 FC 279 - 2008-02-29
Federal Court DecisionsThe Plaintiff’s evidence, however, indicates that the action before the Federal Court deals with a separate program, namely the MPC program, as opposed to the proportional integral derivative (PID) program which was the object of the action initiated in Alberta. [...] I am satisfied that it represents a fair estimate of the costs likely to be incurred by the Attorney General of Canada should this matter proceed.
-
7,770.
Thambithurai v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2006 FC 751 - 2006-06-20
Federal Court DecisionsThese documents indicate that the applicant was arrested in Paris on February 16, 1988 with other people in a deliberate act of trying to deal 720 grams and 560 grams of heroin. [...] [18] Consequently, the application for judicial review is granted, the decision of the IAD dated June 14, 2005, in all fairness, is set aside and the matter is sent back to the IAD for determination in accordance with these Reasons.
-
7,771.
Basak v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 1496 - 2005-11-03
Federal Court Decisions[16] I am similarly not persuaded that the Board's statement that Ms. Basak exaggerated her claim was fair. [...] [23] Counsel for Ms. Basak proposed a question for certification dealing with the extent of the Board's obligation to inquire into the suitability of a proposed Designated Representative.
-
7,772.
Carrillo v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 548 - 2004-04-08
Federal Court DecisionsOn a fair and balanced reading of the decision, and the record, it cannot be said that the findings of fact were patently unreasonable. [...] -- It is true that artful pleaders can find any number of errors when dealing with decisions of administrative tribunals".
-
7,773.
Jarvis v. Canada (Treasury Board) - 2004 FC 300 - 2004-02-27
Federal Court Decisions[5] First, I do not think that a mere failure to mention certain evidence in the decision constitutes a breach of the rules of natural justice or procedural fairness. [...] The descriptions provided by the employer consisted of ten or more pages and contained a significant amount of general or specialized information dealing with a host of aspects grouped under the headings of responsibility, skills, effort and working conditions.
-
7,774.
New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council v. Bruce - 2003 FC 1181 - 2003-10-10
Federal Court Decisions91. Il sera loisible à la Reine, de l'avis et du consentement du Sénat et de la Chambre des Communes, de faire des lois pour la paix, l'ordre et le bon gouvernement du Canada, relativement à toutes les matières ne tombant pas dans les catégories de sujets par la présente loi exclusivement assignés aux législatures des [...] They deal with Indians qua Indians. They are related to "Indianness" (per Beetz J. in Four B, supra, at 1047 S.C.R.).
-
7,775.
Slobodrian v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) - 2003 FCA 350 - 2003-09-26
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[10] Dealing first with this last argument, the Act does not define the word "gift" as it is used in section 110.1 of the Act. This provision merely entitles one to claim a tax credit by reference to the "fair market value of a gift" made ... in the year ..."