Advanced Search

Dongnam Oil & Fats Co. v. Chemex Ltd. - 2004 FC 1732 - 2004-12-10

As put by Côté on the Interpretation of Legislation in Canada, Third Edition (2000), Carwell, at page 472, dealing with general principles which favour individual rights and freedoms:   [...]  Interestingly, H.B. Contracting involved carriage within Canada, but that does not take away from the fact that the court placed a fairly extensive restriction on the language used in the Canadian Water Carriage and Goods Act, which is appropriate in this instance, notwithstanding the submissions of the Plaintiff.   [...]  [25] I will first deal with the request of Chemex for a stay. The plain wording applicable to the 24 May 2002 charterparty, between Chemex and Dongnam, is that there be London arbitration.

Jacques St-Onge Inc. v. The Queen - 2001-04-18

The ship was to be used for cod fishing, but MTI had a great deal of difficulty operating it profitably because of the disappearance of cod stocks in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.   [...]  (ii) to a person with whom the taxpayer was dealing at arm's length of any property that is   [...]  (C) the fair market value of the share is nil, and (D) it is reasonable to expect that the corporation will be dissolved or wound up and will not commence to carry on business

Buffalo v. Canada - 2005 FC 1622 - 2005-11-30

Rather, they are animated by broad, flexible principles, applied purposively to promote truth-finding and fairness.   [...]  I continued to assure them that the representatives of the Queen would do what was right and fair.   [...]  Accordingly, I do not propose to deal with this evidence any further.

Jeyaratnam v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2018 FC 1244 - 2018-12-11

Evaluating whether procedural fairness, or the duty of fairness, has been adhered to by a tribunal requires an assessment of the procedures and safeguards required in a particular situation.   [...]  A court assessing a procedural fairness argument is required to ask whether the procedure was fair having regard to all of the circumstances, including the Baker factors.   [...]  [48] The RPD deals with this issue in the following way: [13] The principal claimant meets all the criteria for citizenship as:

Pacificador v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2007 FC 1050 - 2007-10-15

[35] Finally, the panel considered Arturo Pacificador’s acquittal as a sign that his son would receive a fair trial on his return.   [...]  Since the standard can be different for each of the issues raised by the applicant, it is appropriate to deal with them separately.   [...]  At the very least, they establish a significant risk that the appellant will not be fairly treated upon his surrender...

Appiah v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 1309 - 2021-11-26

[20] As a starting point, I do not accept the Applicant’s submission that because the Officer regarded the Applicant’s six-year residency in Canada to be “a fairly short period of time”, that determination became an overriding factor in the Decision.   [...]  As a result my children have grown attached to and rely on Juliana for support as well and if she leaves now it is not fair to me or my children but I simply cannot help it, without Juliana here helping my wife and me, we simply are unable to cope.   [...]  Those interests must be “well identified and defined” and examined “with a great deal of attention” in light of all the evidence: Legault v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2002] 4 F.C. 358 (C.A.), at paras. 12 and 31; Kolosovs v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 323 F.T.R. 181, at paras.

McBride v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FC 118 - 2018-02-05

The regulation that replaced SOR/2003-181 is meaningfully different, as a level II adjudicator does not engage in a de novo analysis, but rather considers whether the “decision at the initial level contravenes the principles of procedural fairness, is based on an error of law or is clearly unreasonable:” Commissioner’s   [...]  However, given that the other grievance related to Sgt. McBride’s replacement on Deer Island, if his or her circumstances differed from those of Sgt. McBride, the onus of proving that difference rested on the RCMP because it was the RCMP which was responsible for having destroyed all paperwork dealing with the grievance.   [...]  This improper analysis of the burden results in a decision that is not reasonable, and most certainly in a decision that is not fair in light of the two identical grievances.

Canadian Forest Navigation Co. Ltd. v. The Queen - 2016 TCC 43 - 2016-02-12

Rather, the court merely seeks to assist in the enforcement of what has already been decided in another forum.” This reflects the principle of comity, which is grounded on the concepts of order and fairness.   [...]  At paragraph 54, the Supreme Court went on to say: “. . . in recognition and enforcement proceedings, order and fairness are protected by ensuring that a real and substantial connection existed between the foreign court and the underlying dispute.   [...]  [30] Even though the tax authorities have no acquired rights in civil law, LeBel J., in my view, does not sanction a general license to travel back through time with the benefit of hindsight to reverse or correct unintended tax consequences of commercial dealings.

Dinok v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2014 FC 1199 - 2014-12-12

Rather, the Board found that they were fairly wealthy because of the principal Applicant’s business success.   [...]  I agree with the Respondent that the adequacy of reasons is not about procedural fairness and does not engage review by this Court on a standard of correctness as the Applicant would have it.   [...]  ... I find on balance that Hungary is making serious efforts to address these problems, and that the police and government officials are both willing and able to protect victims and that there are operation [sic] adequacies in place to deal with both discrimination and violence directed towards minorities, including the

Lee v. The Queen - 2013 TCC 289 - 2013-09-16

The hearing lasted five days, and had to be scheduled over a fairly lengthy period of time.   [...]  In my view, it would not be fair to change the allegations without some explanation so that Mr. Lee could deal with it at the hearing.

AB v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 1487 - 2012-02-22

• Mexico is a democracy with free and fair elections; • There is a relatively independent and impartial judiciary;   [...]  [24] The Board concluded that the Mexican government is taking significant steps to deal with corruption and to provide mechanisms for the public to report crimes and corruption within the system.   [...]  [27] The applicants allege that the Board breached its duty of procedural fairness by: (a) refusing a pre-hearing request for a postponement; (b) providing inadequate reasons for refusing an adjournment request at the hearing; and (c) failing to meet a legitimate expectation.

Tiede v. The Queen - 2011 TCC 84 - 2011-02-10

[10] I will deal with each of these issues separately. [11] As for whether the business commenced at all, the conclusion that I have reached is that a business did commence early in February 2003.   [...]  Each case turns on its own facts, but where a taxpayer has taken significant and essential steps that are necessary to the carrying on of the business it is fair to conclude that the business has started.   [...]  The respondent accepts that the rents are fair market value. [31] In their tax returns for 2004 and 2005, Mr. and Mrs. Tiede claimed aggregate rental losses in the amounts of $6,143.96 and $7,404.70, respectively.

Hurtado Prieto v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2010 FC 253 - 2010-03-04

Issues 2, 3 and 4 go to the procedural fairness of the impugned decision and must be decided on a standard of correctness.   [...]  It is well established that no deference is owed to the decision maker in this regard and that it is up to this Court to form its own opinion as to the fairness of the hearing (see Gonzalez v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2008 FC 983 at paragraph 16).   [...]  [45] Because of my finding on this issue, I need not deal with the remaining issues.