11,312 result(s)
-
8,601.
Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Sohail - 2017 FC 995 - 2017-11-03
Federal Court Decisions[14] I will first deal with the preliminary issue raised by Ms. Sohail. [...] These exceptions include: (i) an affidavit providing general background assisting in understanding the issues relevant to the judicial review; (ii) an affidavit necessary to bring evidence on procedural defects or a breach of procedural fairness; and (iii) an affidavit highlighting the complete absence of evidence before [...] I accept that the provisions dealing with immigration sponsorship by family members in the IRPA and the Regulations reflect both the objective of family reunification, and the intention of the legislator to prevent adoptions made for immigration purposes.
-
8,602.
Coathup v. M.N.R. - 2017 TCC 54 - 2017-04-06
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[17] Concerning the private students, the appellant confirmed that she registers them but after that, she lets the teachers deal directly with the parents to organize the location and the timing of the lessons. [...] I believe it is fair for me to expect an immediate and sustained correction to these concerns or I will need to be more progressive in my actions to deal with them.
-
8,603.
Wang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2017 FC 19 - 2017-01-06
Federal Court DecisionsThis kind of reasoning process was most recently rejected by Mr. Justice Boswell in Ren v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2015 FC 1402 who found at paragraph 25 that “the RPD has to deal separately and squarely with the documentary evidence before coming to an overall credibility finding” [emphasis in original]. [...] The RPD did not deal separately with the Church letter. It made a series of rolling credibility findings, each following and justifying the other. [...] While the Applicant did not argue a breach of procedural fairness, I have concerns about the way that the RPD, on multiple occasions, lost track of its question and then challenged the Applicant on non-existent contradictions or evasiveness.
-
8,604.
Équiterre v. Canada (Health) - 2016 FC 554 - 2016-05-17
Federal Court DecisionsWhile mootness is a relevant issue, for reasons outlined, it is appropriate for this Court to deal with some of the issues raised as being moot. [...] 17 (4) Toute personne peut faire une demande d’examen spécial au ministre, en la forme et de la façon qu’il précise. [...] [43] This is a case primarily dealing with statutory interpretation, not government policy.
-
8,605.
Li v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2016 FC 451 - 2016-04-21
Federal Court DecisionsThose 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. [...] a) directement ou indirectement, faire une présentation erronée sur un fait important quant à un objet pertinent, ou une réticence sur ce fait, ce qui entraîne ou risque d’entraîner une erreur dans l’application de la présente loi; [...] Secondly, the IAD unreasonably considered the best interests of the, then, unborn child by simply stating that the child’s interests had been taken into consideration; that is not sufficient; the IAD had the obligation to identify, define and examine, “with a great deal of attention”, in light of the evidence the unborn
-
8,606.
Université Laval v. The Queen - 2016 TCC 17 - 2016-01-20
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[62] The Appellant argues that if the Court were to conclude that the supply was taxable, the matter should then be returned to the Canada Revenue Agency to establish the fair market value before applying it to the cost of the facilities. [...] [67] In this case, we are dealing with a public sector body, as defined in subsection 123(1) of the ETA: [...] [76] We should therefore look at Section 25 of Part VI of Schedule V of the ETA, which deals with exempt supplies and more specifically the supply of real property by a public service body.
-
8,607.
Ren v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 1402 - 2015-12-18
Federal Court Decisions[22] In this case, while some of the RPD’s questions about the Applicant’s faith appear basic or fair, most of the questions in this regard assess the correctness of the Applicant’s theological knowledge, so much so that the RPD lost sight of the central question of the genuineness or sincerity of the Applicant’s beliefs. [...] On the contrary, the RPD has to deal separately and squarely with the documentary evidence before coming to an overall credibility finding. [...] To properly do so, it was necessary for the RPD to first deal with the authenticity of the documentary evidence in its own right.
-
8,608.
Johnson v. Tait - 2015 FCA 247 - 2015-11-05
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[9] Part 6 of the Election Regulations deals with removal of the Mayor or Council members from office. [...] Ms. Johnson decided she would convene a special Band Council meeting to deal with the allegation and had the Band secretary send an email notice to the Councillors and the Mayor on July 22, 2014 for an emergency special Band Council meeting to be held the next day. [...] [36] By way of guidance, however, I would note that the following should be applied in any future process to remove a Mayor or Councillor to ensure compliance with the requirements of procedural fairness:
-
8,609.
Lavigne v. Pare - 2015 FC 631 - 2015-05-13
Federal Court DecisionsAccording to the plaintiff, the Court must also consider the fairness of these prior proceedings before concluding that he is a vexatious litigant. [...] • T-1507-07 (Lavigne v Canada Post Corporation): the plaintiff filed a notice of application for judicial review of a decision of the Canadian Human Rights Commission not to deal with a complaint. [...] At the risk of repeating myself, for example, one grievance, three complaints before the CHRC, six actions in the Federal Court (T-831-06, T-206-07, T-1507-07, T-105-10, T-107-10 and T-1632-13) and two actions in the Superior Court all deal with the same allegations of discrimination, harassment, discriminatory suspension
-
8,610.
Akuffo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2014 FC 1063 - 2014-11-12
Federal Court DecisionsIn rejecting this standard of review, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the question was not one of law of central importance to the legal system as a whole because while as a conceptual matter, limitation periods are generally of central importance to the fair administration of justice, there was no reason why the [...] The question involved confidential contracts as provided under the Canada Transportation Act, SC 1996, c 10 and the availability of a mechanism set up to deal with complaints, limited to shippers that met conditions stipulated in the provision at issue (paras 55 and 60). [...] * * * [51] In a correspondence addressed to the Court after the hearing, the respondent expressed the view that it is not appropriate to certify a question in this case, in light of the number of cases challenged before the Court, dealing with RAD decisions and the numerous questions of general importance already certified.
-
8,611.
Speciale v. The Queen - 2013 TCC 254 - 2013-08-13
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIt is not fair to disallow these credits. [65] There were no facts presented to support the presumptions contained in the Amended Reply. [...] It must be made to a recipient who was dealing with the taxpayer at arm’s length. [...] [85] In Lau, it was decided that where partners are dealing with third parties at non-arm’s length they must be put on notice.
-
8,612.
Etiz v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2013 FC 308 - 2013-03-26
Federal Court Decisions[18] With respect to the third issue, it is well established that the standard of review applicable to a question of fairness or natural justice is one of correctness (Dunsmuir, above, at para 129; Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v Khosa, 2009 SCC 12 at para 72, [2009] 1 SCR 339). [...] The applicant submits that this is particularly troubling in light of the fact that the Board Member agreed that cruel and unusual punishment was an issue at the beginning of the hearing (see page 269 of the Tribunal Record), that there was evidence dealing with the harsh prison conditions in Turkey, including abuses and [...] Therefore, I will deal with it briefly. Although the Tribunal Officer should not have communicated with the Board Member outside the presence of the applicant and his counsel, I consider that there was no breach of natural justice in the particular circumstances of this case.
-
8,613.
Apotex Inc. v. Canada (Health) - 2012 FCA 322 - 2012-12-07
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsIn his view, the application involved “a fairness challenge to three discrete administrative decisions” (reasons, paragraph 18), and Apotex’ position was a “colourable device intended to permit Apotex to avoid violating both the letter and the spirit of [sub]section 18.1(2) of the Federal Courts Act and Rule 302” (reasons, [...] The underlying consideration, however, which, as it seems to me, must be borne in mind in dealing with any application of this kind, is whether, in the circumstances presented, to do justice between the parties calls for the grant of the extension. [...] considerations as ‘relevant’ or irrelevant to its exercise.” The Court rejected the proposition that the Minister’s discretion was, as a matter of statutory construction, sufficiently broad to embrace considerations other than those dealing with safety and efficacy (reasons, Federal Court of Appeal at paragraph 65).
-
8,614.
Rock v. The Queen - 2010 TCC 607 - 2010-11-30
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[18] She also worked with elders on reserves to help them through the process of dealing with their residential school experience. [...] [28] That case deals with four applications which the Respondent describes as test applications relating to three types of groups. [...] [3] The Supreme Court in Southwind v. Canada, [1998] 1 CTC 265, 98 DTC 6084 (FCA) (in the context of employment) suggested a fairly long list of factors that might be considered.
-
8,615.
Hershkovitz v. Tyco Safety Products Canada Ltd. - 2010 FCA 190 - 2010-07-19
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[5] In order to understand the issues in this case and to understand the decision of the Federal Court, it is necessary to deal briefly with some basic questions. [...] However, when the appellants filed the disclaimer to deal with the overbreadth of the original '670 patent, they were admitting that claims in the patent were overbroad. [...] Such a result does not seem fair, consistent with the orderly functioning of the Act, nor compatible with the bargain that lies at the heart of our patent system.
-
8,616.
Dart Aerospace Ltd. v. Duval - 2010 FC 755 - 2010-07-19
Federal Court DecisionsIn so doing, the Court requires a fairly complete set of factual findings (Northern Telecom, above, at paragraph 46). [...] According to Le Petit Robert, 1992, “entreprises” is defined as “opérations de commerce” or “commercial dealings” (my translation). [...] As noted by the Supreme Court of Canada in Fastfrate, above, at paragraph 68, given the primary competence of the provinces over labour relations, only “a limited genus of works and undertakings should qualify as federal.” Dealing with a freight forwarding company who conducted business across provincial lines but who did
-
8,617.
Long v. The Queen - 2010 TCC 197 - 2010-04-14
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsAlthough he was dealing with the then Rule 448 of the Federal Court Rules, it is similar to our present Rule 82. [...] I have put in the words "either directly or indirectly," because, as it seems to me, a document can properly be said to contain information which may enable the party requiring the affidavit either to advance his own case or to damage the case of his adversary, if it is a document which may fairly lead him to a train of [...] [25] The Respondent argued that the Appellant has alternate viable avenues to obtain the requested information and documents or to deal with his other concerns and that these factors should be a consideration in deciding if full disclosure under Rule 82 is appropriate.
-
8,618.
Bonavia Jr. v. The Queen - 2009 TCC 289 - 2009-05-28
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsAppellant’s Dealings with NBI in Trust inc. 5. On February 6, 2001 the Appellant made a loan application to NBI in Trust inc. [...] that is conditional in any way on the existence of the fund may be extended to the annuitant or to a person with whom the annuitant was not dealing at arm’s length; and [...] (b) the taxpayer who was the annuitant under the fund before it became an amended fund shall, in computing the taxpayer's income for the taxation year that includes that day, include as income received out of the fund at that time an amount equal to the fair market value of all the property held in connection with the fund
-
8,619.
Apotex Inc. v. Wellcome Foundation Limited - 2009 FC 117 - 2009-02-03
Federal Court Decisions[23] Before dealing with the proposed amendments, it is worthwhile to review the nature of the document for which leave to amend is being sought. [...] There have been numerous motions and hearings relating to discovery, and an additional week has been set aside in March 2009 to deal with interlocutory motions. [...] On the understanding that Novopharm will be given full opportunity to conduct discovery of GSK with respect to the Royalty Amendment, the factual issue raised by the proposed amendment can be fairly and properly litigated and determined at the reference.
-
8,620.
Canada (National Revenue) v. Lépine - 2008 FC 1106 - 2008-10-02
Federal Court DecisionsAfter considering the case law dealing with the former version of s.225.2 he concluded [at D.T.C. 5510] that in a s.225.2(8) application the Minister has the ultimate burden of justifying the decision despite the fact that s.225.2 as amended no longer includes the former paragraph (5) that specifically stated that "on the [...] [11] I am satisfied that the Minister should only proceed by way of application for a jeopardy order under subsection 225.2(2), ex parte, where she or he is able to demonstrate to a judge that a jeopardy order is necessary to protect the Minister's position and that no alternative procedure that is more fair to the taxpayer [...] [28] I point out here that the respondent’s criticisms, including those specifically raised in the respondent’s written representations, deal primarily with the hypothetical, inadequate or decontextualized nature of certain allegations made by Mr. Goyette and Ms. Plante in their respective affidavits.
-
8,621.
Dixon v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2008 FC 889 - 2008-07-18
Federal Court Decisions[7] The relevant provisions of the Act dealing with day parole that must be considered in this application are subsections 122(1), 122(4) and 123(5), which read as follows: [...] The relevant provision of the Regulations dealing with day parole that is relevant to this application is subsection 157(2), which reads as follows: [...] 157.(2) Sous réserve du paragraphe (3), la Commission doit examiner le cas du délinquant qui présente une demande de mise en semi-liberté conformément au paragraphe (1) dans les six mois suivant la réception de la demande, mais elle n'est pas tenue de le faire plus de deux mois avant la date de l'admissibilité du délinquant
-
8,622.
Ferraro v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2008 FC 815 - 2008-06-27
Federal Court DecisionsThese reasons deal with the hearing of his judicial review application. [...] I need not deal with this objection as counsel for the parties agreed that those affidavits should be struck from the record provided that new affidavits could be sworn and re-filed with the Court without agreed to deleted paragraphs. [...] He did not have to decide, in the case before him, which standard of review applied because the only issue in that case was one of procedural fairness which he ruled was subject to the correctness standard.
-
8,623.
Merchant Law Group v. The Queen - 2008 TCC 337 - 2008-06-13
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsOf the six issues before the Court (there were really only 5, as issue 1 and 3 were related), the Appellant was successful in three of them, one of which was conceded in the course of the Appellant’s closing argument, the second one, namely the one dealing with legal disbursements made in an agent capacity should not have [...] This case required a fair amount of preparation for the trial. It was complex in terms of numbers and co-relating documents that needed to be presented to assure a proper evidentiary flow. [...] The issue with respect to the entitlement to additional ITCs and the issue dealing with the alleged errors in the CRA audit were also not complex matters.
-
8,624.
Gates v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2007 FC 1058 - 2007-10-16
Federal Court Decisionsd) ait la possibilité de faire au moins une heure d'exercice par jour, en plein air si le temps le permet ou, dans le cas contraire, à l'intérieur. [...] [25] Justice Pelletier, while on the Trial Division, in Marachelian v. Canada (Attorney General) (T.D.), [2001] 1 F.C. 17, had to deal with a similar issue. [...] While not dealing with freedom issues, as in Ferndale, the Court is faced with health issues which are serious matters.
-
8,625.
Johnson v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2007 FC 1021 - 2007-10-04
Federal Court Decisions5. The settlement agreement is fair and reasonable. It provides financial compensation, renewed employment, and guaranteed training and counselling for the applicant. [...] As noted in Loyer v. Air Canada, [2006] F.C.J. No. 1473 at paragraph 47, 2006 FC 1172, the mandate of the Commission “requires that it deal, on a daily basis, with examination and resolution of human rights complaints.” Thus, it appears that issues of settlement appear to fall directly within the expertise of the [...] [40] It appears that Parliament’s intent was to give the Commission a great deal of discretion under section 48 in approving or rejecting settlements.