11,309 result(s)
-
851.
Municipalité régionale de comté des Îles-de-la-Madeleine v. The Queen - 2006 TCC 235 - 2005-04-12
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIf it does, was the allocation method chosen by the appellant fair and reasonable? [...] [13] Due to the inevitable learning curve, and to circumstances over which it had no control, the appellant had to deal with delays that were much longer than it had hoped. [...] This is superfluous when dealing with a well-defined or clearly identifiable exempt activity, in which case no ITC can be claimed.
-
852.
I.M.P. Group ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Public Works and Government Services) - 2006 FC 1223 - 2006-10-13
Federal Court DecisionsIn this case there was a Fairness Monitor in place, at least most of the time. [...] MaxSys did not really deal with the question raised in this case: the length of time the entity had been in business. [...] However, as this point took up a great deal of argument, some comment is appropriate.
-
853.
Northwest Territories v. Public Service Alliance of Canada - 2001 FCA 162 - 2001-05-24
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[...] I think subparagraph 52(b)(i) authorizes this Court to deal with the issues not considered by the motions judge that were before him. [...] Accordingly, I shall deal with the three questions that the application for judicial review raised before the motions judge. [...] Whether appearing before an administrative tribunal or a court of law, a litigant has a right to expect that an impartial adjudicator will deal with his or her claims....
-
854.
Peguis First Nation v. Bear - 2017 FC 179 - 2017-02-13
Federal Court DecisionsAt the conclusion of the meeting, Councillors asked to deal with a few community member requests. [...] [49] The meeting was called to deal with Band business, in particular the Audit Report. [...] The Councillors could have requested a special meeting for the purpose of dealing with BCR 38.
-
855.
Pomerleau v. Canada - 2018 FCA 129 - 2018-06-29
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions(i) the fair market value, immediately after the disposition, of the share [...] (ii) the fair market value, immediately after the disposition, of all shares of the capital stock of the corporation owned by the taxpayer [...] D is the fair market value, immediately after the disposition, of any consideration (other than the new shares) received by the taxpayer from the purchaser corporation for the subject shares,
-
856.
Canada v. Loewen - 2004 FCA 146 - 2004-04-06
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsI will then describe the facts of this case and deal with the issues raised by the parties. [...] fair market value of Mr. Loewen's interest in the software. That is essentially what the Crown was permitted to do in Anchor Pointe. [...] Therefore, it is not necessary for me to deal with the other arguments presented for Mr. Loewen on this issue.
-
857.
United Parcel Service of Canada v. Thibodeau - 2005 FC 608 - 2005-05-05
Federal Court DecisionsIt would then be up to the Commission to decide whether to proceed with dealing with the complaint or not. [...] Accordingly, this means that it intended the Commission to be able to deal with a complaint during or after exhausting the grievance procedure (41(1)(a)). [...] Commission to deal with complaint 41. (1) Subject to section 40, the Commission shall deal with any complaint filed with it unless in respect of that complaint it appears to the Commission that
-
858.
Kouka v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2006 FC 1236 - 2006-10-17
Federal Court DecisionsIt is certain, with Baker, that the interests of the children are one factor that an immigration officer must examine with a great deal of attention. [...] [27] When dealing with a new H&C application, an immigration officer naturally takes into account comments made in an earlier decision. [...] It is true that artful pleaders can find any number of errors when dealing with decisions of administrative tribunals.
-
859.
ZT22 Holding Inc. v. The Queen - 2013 TCC 17 - 2013-01-21
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsMr. Tohme and the appellant are not dealing with each at arm’s length within the meaning of subsection 325(2) of the ETA. The amount of the assessment is $18,879.44. [...] It is obvious that he was a related person with respect to ZT22 within the meaning of subsection 325(2) of the ETA and that he was not dealing with the appellant at arm’s length. [...] (c) another person with whom the transferor was not dealing at arm’s length,
-
860.
Aird v. Country Park Village Properties (Mainland) Ltd. - 2004 FC 551 - 2004-04-13
Federal Court DecisionsAnalysis of Fair Market Rent [71] There is jurisprudence that deals with leases of First Nations land. [...] His efforts to rationalize his net taxes approach, by stating that he was dealing with a gross rent, were both unconvincing and unimpressive. [...] I will have more to say about the common area costs when I deal with the issue of additional expenses.
-
861.
Shiferaw v. Canada Post Corporation - 2011 FC 1046 - 2011-09-02
Federal Court DecisionsThis grievance resulted in a commitment by Canada Post to treat all employees in a fair and reasonable manner, and to remove the offending letters from Mr. Shiferaw’s file. [...] [20] The Commission clearly treated the parties fairly, having given both of them an opportunity to review the investigator’s report and make submissions on it. [...] Commission to deal with complaint 41. (1) Subject to section 40, the Commission shall deal with any complaint filed with it unless in respect of that complaint it appears to the Commission that
-
862.
High-Crest Enterprises Limited v. Canada - 2017 FCA 88 - 2017-04-28
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsThe appellant’s silence has different ramifications depending on the issue we are dealing with. [...] [78] Remember that we are dealing here with just the opening, jurisdictional question: can the Chief Justice potentially reassign? [...] In these circumstances, are we bound to deal with that issue? In my view, no.
-
863.
Ngo v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2002 FCT 1150 - 2002-11-07
Federal Court Decisions1. Did the Program Manager have jurisdiction to deal with the application on H & C grounds? [...] i) Did the Program Manager have jurisdiction to deal with the application on H & C grounds? [...] [29] This was sufficient, in my view, to make applicable those provisions of the Regulations which deal with assisted relatives.
-
864.
Sanofi Pasteur Limited v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2008 FC 286 - 2008-03-04
Federal Court DecisionsThe Board proceeded to deal with the motions in the order the Board Chairperson had proposed. [...] Would he think that it is more likely than not that [the decision maker], whether consciously or unconsciously, would not decide fairly.” [...] Regardless of what decision the Board makes on the merits of the Proceeding, the fundamental flaw in the fairness will remain.
-
865.
Fisehaye v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2022 FC 1358 - 2022-09-28
Federal Court DecisionsDid the Officer fail to observe principles of procedural fairness? B. [...] [48] On issues of procedural fairness, the standard of review is correctness. [...] The Applicant suggests the Officer did not deal with this evidence because they believed she left Eritrea for economic reasons.
-
866.
Manna v. The Queen - 2019 TCC 70 - 2019-04-03
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsA person with whom the transferor was not dealing at arm’s length. 4) The fair market value of the property transferred must exceed the fair market value of the consideration given by the transferee. [...] (c) a person with whom the person was not dealing at arm’s length, the following rules apply: [...] (i) the amount, if any, by which the fair market value of the property at the time it was transferred exceeds the fair market value at that time of the consideration given for the property, and
-
867.
Gonzales v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2018 FC 10 - 2018-01-08
Federal Court DecisionsThis section also notes that, though the applicant had no convictions for a significant period, he admits that he was dealing drugs for financial gain during some of that time. [...] [19] The applicant’s arguments concerning procedural fairness can be identified as follows: [...] B. Procedural Fairness Issues (1) Procedures for Considering Inadmissibility of a Long Term Permanent Resident
-
868.
Rezaei v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2002 FCT 1259 - 2002-12-05
Federal Court Decisions[21] Procedural fairness and natural justice were discussed on two fronts. [...] (b) prescribing a system of priorities for dealing with matters before the Refugee Division, Appeal Division or Adjudication Division; [...] We are dealing here with the powers of an administrative tribunal in relation to its procedures.
-
869.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Watkin - 2007 FC 745 - 2007-07-13
Federal Court Decisions1. Whether the Commission has the jurisdiction to deal with the complaint against Health Canada. [...] The initial Tribunal concluded that it did have the jurisdiction to deal with the complaint. [...] Accordingly, it is unnecessary to deal with the issue of whether or not Health Canada is a “service provider” within the meaning of section 5 of the Act, or whether the applicant’s procedural fairness rights were breached by the Commission.
-
870.
Mcleod Lake Indian Band v. Chingee - 1998-05-08
Federal Court DecisionsI turn now to Parts B, C, and D of the Plaintiffs' motion, dealing with answers to questions from the discoveries of those three defendants. [...] [19] That portion of the motion dealing with further particulars is dismissed. [...] The Defendants, Gilbert Chingee and Victor Chingee, shall answer those questions dealing with financial matters which are set out in the motion.
-
871.
Leblanc v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2010 FC 688 - 2010-06-23
Federal Court Decisions[21] Based on the above, I find that the duty to act fairly was not breached by the Minister in rendering the fairness decision. [...] He submits that the taxation years 1998, 1999 and 2000 were captured by the Settlement Agreement by counsel for the Ministers on October 24, 2002, to help “close the deal.” [...] The applicant argues that the Minister included the 1998, 1999 and 2000 taxation years to close the deal with the applicant on October 24, 2002.
-
872.
Canadian National Railway Company v. Canada (Transportation Agency) - 2021 FCA 173 - 2021-08-24
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsThese will be considered in the context of the following discussion pertaining to the alleged breaches of procedural fairness. [...] [44] CN alleges that the Agency breached its duty of procedural fairness in three respects. [...] In dealing with CP’s embargoes, the Agency explained why it found them reasonable in the circumstances:
-
873.
Thomas v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2013 FC 292 - 2013-03-20
Federal Court DecisionsAs noted above, deference is owed to such decision-makers, given their expertise in dealing with harassment complaints. [...] [89] I do not agree that procedural fairness requires such an approach. [...] [90] To reiterate, there was no breach of procedural fairness in this case.
-
874.
Gauthier v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FCA 96 - 2018-05-23
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsThe Commission also noted that PSPC’s ability to defend the complaint would not be seriously prejudiced by the delay in filing the complaint, but found that this factor was not sufficient in and of itself to justify dealing with the complaint. [...] On judicial review, the Federal Court found that the Commission reviewed these factors in a fair and impartial manner, and could reasonably find that they were not sufficient to offset the one-year time limit set out in the CHRA. Again, this Court sees no reason to intervene with this finding. [...] [7] Finally, the appellant argues that the Federal Court breached the requirements of procedural fairness by referring to the September 6, 2016 “constraint letter”, which was purportedly not before the Commission.
-
875.
Osei v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1998-03-05
Federal Court Decisions[7] I find that the written reasons disclose a reviewable error of law in dealing with the objection made. [...] It is abundantly clear that by s. 67 of the Immigration Act that the CRDD does have jurisdiction to deal with the kind of objection made by Mr. Matas. [...] [8] I find the error made is highly significant to a fair hearing of Ms. Osei's case.