Advanced Search

Latimer v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2014 FC 886 - 2014-09-16

31 A Policy Manual has been adopted by the National Parole Board under the authority of section 151 of the CCRA. Chapter 7.2 of the Manual deals with "Residency and Day Parole Leave Privileges" and observes that the Board is responsible "for establishing the parameter of leave privileges to be associated with an approved   [...]  (e) offenders are provided with relevant information, reasons for decisions and access to the review of decisions in order to ensure a fair and understandable conditional release process.   [...]  e) de manière à assurer l’équité et la clarté du processus, les autorités doivent donner aux délinquants les motifs des décisions, ainsi que tous autres renseignements pertinents, et la possibilité de les faire réviser.

Larionova v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2013 FC 874 - 2013-08-15

[39] Obviously, by undertaking its own research and relying on the fruits of that research to come to conclusion not submitted by any of the parties in relation to an issue before the Board, it breached the fundamental rules of procedural fairness, which normally would require that the matter be sent back for   [...]  In other words, it is argued that removing this finding out of the decision would not impact on the reasonableness from all of the evidence that the state was acting to deal with issues in a fashion that meets the requirements of Canadian law to conclude adequate state protection.   [...]  [44] Accordingly, I accept the Minister’s submission that despite the failure in procedural fairness by the Board going outside the confines of the hearing, assuming no conclusion was made on the likely cause of death, this would not nullify the evidence that the Board relied upon to sustain its conclusion that state

Marcotte v. The Queen - 2012 TCC 336 - 2012-09-27

(c) another person with whom the transferor was not dealing at arm’s length,   [...]  A is the amount, if any, by which the fair market value of the property at that time exceeds the fair market value at that time of the consideration given by the transferee for the transfer of the property, and

Abalos v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 608 - 2011-05-25

[7] On July 22, 2010, the immigration officer whose decision is now under review sent the applicant a “fairness letter” informing her that the requirements set out in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227 [Regulations] for permanent residence as a member of the live-in caregiver class were no   [...]  He reiterated what he had stated in the July 22, 2010 fairness letter: that the applicant no longer satisfied the requirement set out in paragraph 113(1)(e) of the Regulations.   [...]  in support of the proposition that the primary purpose of the live-in caregiver program is to facilitate the attainment of permanent resident status of foreign domestic workers and that, therefore, it is incumbent on immigration officials to adopt a “flexible and constructive approach” in dealing with program participants.

Malveda v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 447 - 2008-04-04

[21] Where the adequacy of the Board’s reasons is called into question, the issue raised is one of procedural fairness (Thomas v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2007 FC 838, [2007] F.C.J. No. 1114 (QL) at para. 14; Adu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 565, [2005] F.C.J. No. 693  [...]  Pursuant to Canadian Union of Public Employees (C.U.P.E.) v. Ontario (Minister of Labour), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 539, [2003] S.C.J. No. 28 (QL) at para. 100, “it is for the courts, not the Minister, to provide the legal answer to procedural fairness questions.”   [...]  [39] In the Decision in this case, there is no attempt to raise and discuss what the Applicant actually said on this issue, or to identify those aspects of the documentary evidence that should be preferred, and why they are to be preferred, and there is no attempt to deal with aspects of the documentary evidence that might

Jalil v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2006 FC 246 - 2006-02-24

3. Did the officer breach the duty of fairness by failing to disclose all information relied on in reaching her decision and by misrepresenting the facts to applicant’s counsel?   [...]  [17] With respect to the claimed breach of the duty of fairness, I have carefully considered the applicant’s detailed written submissions and oral argument and am unable to agree that the officer failed in this regard.   [...]  [40] I suspect that the standards of accuracy, impartiality and reliability described by Dr. Given and for which applicant’s counsel argues, may not be readily achievable in the world in which these decisions are made, particularly when dealing with the history of events in regions where records are not kept with the rigour

Kasaboski v. The Queen - 2005 TCC 356 - 2005-05-19

[8] I shall deal with the Respondent’s objections to the claim in order.   [...]  [13] Mr. Velle offered no rationale for the contention that truckers should be allowed deductions for meals and other expenses at the rates established as non‑accountable allowances for public servants travelling on business for the Government of Canada, other than that he thought it to be fair.   [...]  I have no mandate to allow deductions that are not provided for by Parliament simply on the basis that I think them to be fair.

Siriwardena v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 604 - 2004-04-26

b) ne possède les compétences voulues pour exercer un emploi dans une profession désignée, et ne soit disposé à le faire.   [...]  The respondent submits that the visa officer did not breach the duty of fairness in rejecting this application without an interview, because there is no obligation to continue an assessment where it is apparent that the applicant does not meet key criteria such as the employment requirement.   [...]  [18] I will deal with the fourth and fifth issues together which are:

Les Immeubles Le Séjour Inc. - 2002-08-20

The assessment dated March 16, 2001, and covering the period from January 1 to December 31, 1998, deals primarily with the application of the GST following a September 1, 1995, change in the use of a residential complex.   [...]  [9] Concerning the application of the GST, Mr. Cimon stated that he examined a pro forma balance sheet as well as financial statements of the appellant, in order to find a fair and reasonable method of determining the proportion of the appellant's operations that is GST-taxable and the proportion that is GST-exempt.   [...]  (e) to have paid as a recipient and to have collected as a supplier, at the later of those times, tax in respect of the supply calculated on the fair market value of the complex at the later of those times.

Turcotte v. The Queen - 2002-01-18

[16] Considering their lack of experience and their limited knowledge and financial resources, they made fairly serious progress, although, I admit, they were not an example to be followed.   [...]  [24] In the circumstances, given that one was dealing with novices who, although not reckless, were prepared to do what was necessary to increase their modest incomes, it was relatively easy to recruit and enlist them by taking advantage of the vulnerability of persons already influenced by a previous victim (their   [...]  I take it to be a clear rule of construction that in the imposition of a tax or a duty, and still more of a penalty if there be any fair and reasonable doubt the statute is to be construed so as to give the party sought to be charged the benefit of the doubt.

Main Rehabilitation Co. Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) - 1999-11-23

Finally, Mr. Rankin has submitted that even if there are no grounds for disqualification I ought, nevertheless, to disqualify myself since it will now be impossible for me as the trial judge to hear the plaintiffs" case with fairness and impartiality.   [...]  In procedural disputes such as this one in which the court is required to exercise its discretion having regard to fairness and the expedition of proceedings, each case will turn on its own facts.   [...]  [30] In light of my conclusion above, I need not deal with the Applicants request to convert the application to an action.

Lavigne v. Canada (Commissioner of Official Languages) - 1998-10-16

Second, the information not disclosed to the applicant was exempted under paragraph 22(1)(b) of the Privacy Act on the basis that disclosure would be injurious to the enforcement of the Official Languages Act. Third, the respondent is abiding by the provisions of the Official Languages Act dealing with the confidentiality   [...]  [17] Thus, in responding to the applicant's request for information, OCOL submits that it has tried to balance obligations under the Privacy Act, the Official Languages Act and its duty to act fairly.   [...]  [25] According to the intervenor, the public interest in ensuring fairness to all involved in an investigation far outweighs any prejudice that could result from the disclosure of witness statements11.

Canada (Attorney General) v. Eakin - 2022 FCA 112 - 2022-06-13

As indicated in the previous paragraph, the Chair addressed the issue of fairness surrounding the timing of the production of documents to Mr. Eakin and his ability to prepare to respond to them.   [...]  [54] In my view, this issue can be decided on the basis of fairness.   [...]  I would set aside paragraph 3 of the Federal Court’s judgment dealing with compensation for Mr. Eakin’s financial loss resulting from his job suspension.