Advanced Search

Sangha v. Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board - 2007 FC 856 - 2007-08-31

• [12] On January 28, 2002, Dr. Sangha contacted the North West Territory Fair Practices Office to make a complaint that he had been discriminated against in having not being hired by the Board.   [...]  Because it lacked jurisdiction to deal with the complaint, the North West Territory Fair Practices Office forwarded the complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission (the Commission).   [...]  The interview scores are meant to provide an objective ranking of candidates in order to overcome personal reactions and ensure that a fair and objective ranking is obtained.

Merck Frosst Canada & Co. v. Canada (Minister of Health) - 2000-05-03

(3) Sous réserve du paragraphe (4), la personne qui soumet une liste de brevets doit le faire au moment du dépôt de la demande d'avis de conformité.   [...]  5. (1) Lorsqu'une personne dépose ou a déposé une demande d'avis de conformité pour une drogue et souhaite en faire la comparaison, ou faire renvoi, à une autre drogue qui a été commercialisée au Canada aux termes d'un avis de conformité délivré à la première personne et à l'égard de laquelle une liste de brevets a été   [...]  However, this Court did not deal with this argument in its reasons as such was not necessary.

Davis v. Canada (Royal Mounted Police) - 2023 FC 280 - 2023-02-28

subject to an administrative investigation; the RCMP withheld information; she was denied accommodation for her disability; there was a unilateral change of her contract; she suffered harm to her reputation; harassment; discrimination; and her numerous attempts at resolution were affected by issues of procedural fairness.   [...]  I usually deal with this by asking the other person to read and then say what I meant it to read.   [...]  The Associate Judge then informed the Plaintiff that she, as the decision maker, was obliged to deal with what was contained in the Statement of Claim.

Airzone One Ltd. v. The Queen - 2022 TCC 29 - 2022-02-21

It may be uncertain whether the objective can be achieved at all; or the claimant may be fairly confident that the goals can be achieved, but it is uncertain which of several alternatives will work.   [...]  As such the legislation dealing with such incentives must be given "such fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation as best ensures the attainment of its objects" (Interpretation Act, section 12).   [...]  However, the presence of high hydrocarbon levels in the samples interfered with the flame photometric detector’s ability to measure the RSCs. Additionally, Airzone was not measuring a single RSC. It was dealing with a suite of 18 different RSCs that it needed to measure at once.

Solis Mendoza v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 203 - 2021-03-04

There, the Court adopted a new approach to evaluation of the adequacy of an administrative tribunal’s reasons in holding that the provision of inadequate reasons does not amount to a denial of procedural fairness, provided some reasons are given.   [...]  In so ruling, the Court overturned previous authorities which indicated that failure to provide adequate reasons amounts to a denial of procedural fairness.   [...]   J], and for another example see Justice Russell in Olalere v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2017 FC 385 [Olalere] who addressed the importance of dealing with a psychological report in an IFA analysis: “[59] In my view, the RAD’s failure to deal with this evidence renders the Decision unreasonable.”

AGF Steel Inc. v. Miller Shipping Limited - 2016 FC 461 - 2016-04-22

There will be no genuine issue requiring a trial when the judge is able to reach a fair and just determination on the merits on a motion for summary judgment.   [...]  ... That said, in the context of legislation dealing with the rights and obligations of common carriers and which implements international rules, I am satisfied that this expression [contract for the carriage of goods by water] would not and should not be understood to include charter-parties.   [...]  Charter-parties are contracts between commercial entities dealing directly with each other, whose execution and enforcement are the private concern of the contracting parties.

Apotex Inc. v. Pfizer Canada Inc. - 2013 FC 493 - 2013-05-10

[35] As Apotex’s second objection also applied to evidence from Pfizer’s expert, Dr Jerry Atwood, I will deal with it below.   [...]  Omark deals specifically with testing done during the trial – pendente lite (at para 204).   [...]  [40] The rule, or practice, articulated in Omark is intended to ensure fairness between the parties (Merck & Co Inc v Apotex Inc, 2003 FC 1242, at para 7).

Canadian Generic Pharmaceutical Association v. Canada (Health) - 2011 FC 465 - 2011-04-15

It is fair to say, however, that they do not clearly exclude such recognition.   [...]  One case, Ontario Association of Architects v. Association of Architectural Technologists of Ontario, 2002 FCA 218, does not even discuss the issue of public interest standing but rather deals with the right of appeal in the context of section 56 of the Trade-marks Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-13.   [...]  Accordingly, it was granted standing to bring a declaratory action that the Canadian Public Accountability Board is subject to rules of natural justice and that the Board’s structure does not meet the requirements of natural justice and procedural fairness.

Canada v. Manuge - 2009 FCA 29 - 2009-02-03

[9] Before dealing with the crux of the issue in this appeal, a brief summary of the facts and the history of the proceedings is necessary.   [...]  This is a fairly usual practice under private or public insurance plans.   [...]  [66] In this case, we are dealing with a well-defined question of law that requires little evidence to decide.

Jayasekara v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FCA 404 - 2008-12-17

[34] The concept of “sentence served” remains relevant to the issue of admissibility to Canada by reason of paragraph 36(3)(c) of the IRPA which deals with rehabilitation.   [...]  This is to be contrasted with paragraph 101(2)(a) which deals with inadmissibility by reason of a conviction in Canada.   [...]  [46] I should add for the sake of clarity that Canada, like Great Britain and the United States, has a fair number of hybrid offences, that is to say offences which, depending on the mitigating or aggravating circumstances surrounding their commission, can be prosecuted either summarily or more severely as an indictable

Imperial Oil Resources Limited v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2008 FC 1037 - 2008-09-17

It negotiated and signed a deal that included multiple variables, some to Imperial’s advantage and some to Alberta’s, but none of which can fairly be isolated from the rest and characterized separately.   [...]  (B) in order to achieve a benefit or advantage for the payer or for persons with whom the payer does not deal at arm’s length, or   [...]  (a) amounts receivable and the fair market value of any property receivable by the Crown as a royalty, tax, rental or levy with respect to the Syncrude Project, or as an amount however described, that may reasonably be regarded as being in lieu of any of the preceding amounts;

Charette v. Commissioner of Competition - 2003 FCA 426 - 2003-11-14

(e) the refusal to deal is having or is likely to have an adverse effect on competition in a market,   [...]  (a) to limit unduly the facilities for transporting, producing, manufacturing, supplying, storing or dealing in any product,   [...]  The Supreme Court of Canada decision in Maple Lodge Farms Ltd. v. Canada, [1982] 2 S.C.R. 2 suggests that in making this discretionary decision, the Commissioner simply must not act in bad faith, rely on considerations irrelevant to the Act's purpose or violate the principles of procedural fairness.

Moktari v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001-01-30

[35] As the remaining issues are intertwined, I shall deal with them together.   [...]  15. Is the Minister's direction preventing the Applicant from leaving Canada voluntarily and choosing a country to which he may deport a decision made contrary to the duty of fairness and principles of fundamental justice?   [...]  In dealing with a similar argument in Farhadi v. M.C.I., supra, Gibson J. made the following remarks at paragraphs 18 through 24 (pages 328-30):