Advanced Search

M.A.O. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2003 FC 1406 - 2003-12-02

[77] The former Act and Regulations did not explicitly deal with the collection of DNA evidence and the Respondent has provided no guidelines or policies of CIC that reflect the Department's understanding of the way that this type of evidence is to be requested and applied.   [...]  In my view, it is appropriate to include a direction that deals with the opposite scenario, that is, that certain evidence be excluded from consideration by the IAD.   [...]  In my view, total exclusion of this evidence is required in order for the IAD to fairly assess this matter.

Transport M.l. Couture v. The Queen - 2003-01-16

Michel Couture affirmed that the compensation paid for the trucking services provided by ML1 and ML2 represented the fair market value of these services.   [...]  Finally, he emphasized the fact that the contractual relations between Transport Couture, on the one hand, and ML1 and ML2, on the other hand, were those of parties dealing at arm's length.   [...]  On the other hand, the existence of a distribution, supply or management agreement regarding the manner in which a business is to be conducted that is binding on parties not dealing at arm's length could be a relevant factor for establishing whether an influence is exercised by the controller.

Nourhaghighi v. Canada (Human Rights Commission) - 2001-01-22

I noted that the Federal Court Rules, 1998, do not deal with the impact of failure to file an appearance or late or irregular filing except in relation to the right to receive notice (Rule 145).   [...]  [19] Rule 303 deals with the issue of proper respondents on an application for judicial review such as this.   [...]  Other counsel urged that I should deal with Motion 11 as expeditiously as possible, that is to say, in a continuation of the sitting on the 12th of January.

Winmill v. Canada (Justice) - 2015 FC 710 - 2015-06-05

It further found that the trial judge had “thoroughly, and in a balanced way, reviewed the evidence” and that his charge was both fair and sufficient.   [...]  The rules of procedural fairness did not require the Minister to do so.   [...]  [101] As the Minister points out, this is an attack on the merits of the May 7, 2012 preliminary assessment, not an attack grounded on procedural fairness principles.

Heron v. Salt River First Nation No. 195 - 2024 FC 525 - 2024-04-04

Election Code “for purposes of clarity and public certainty” to, among other things, suspend her for 60 days without pay, ban her from attending the SRFN conference centre and offices, and ban her from interfering with SRFN’s administration, business, and dealings with membership, governments, industry, and SRFN’s bank.   [...]  Furthermore, Chief Heron states that since she was suspended in October 2022, SRFN Council have failed to hold an Annual General Meeting, failed to file their financial statements, and entered into contracts without fair competition.   [...]   has demonstrated that Council has suspended her by repeating conduct the Court found to be unreasonable and procedurally unfair in Heron v SRFN. The Court in Heron v SRFN stated that a suspension of an elected leader and extension of such a suspension are serious matters that require a high degree of procedural fairness.

Kiva Health Brands LLC v. Limoneira Company - 2023 FC 774 - 2023-06-02

[20] The question as to whether there is a reasonable apprehension of bias is a matter of procedural fairness that should be reviewed under a standard akin to that of correctness; the question is whether the procedure was fair having regard to all the circumstances (Canadian Pacific Railway Company v Canada (Attorney   [...]  However, and as indicated above, the Merger Agreement filed in support of Mr. Hamm’s affidavit contradicts the single paragraph in said affidavit dealing with ownership.

Gao v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2022 FC 64 - 2022-01-19

[15] On July 6, 2020, a procedural fairness letter was sent to the Applicants indicating that there were concerns that the Accompanying Spouse was a person described under paragraph 34(1)(f) of IRPA. The letter specified that the Officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the Accompanying Spouse was a member of OCAO, an  [...]  [17] In the Global Case Management System [GCMS] notes, which form part of the reasons for the Officer’s decision, the Officer found that the Applicants had failed to assuage the concerns raised in the procedural fairness letter that the Accompanying Spouse was a member of OCAO, and that OCAO is an organization that has   [...]  The target, therefore, ought to be aware of who they are dealing with.

Li v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 783 - 2020-07-30

Ms Li began to practise the Christian faith, which assisted her to deal with the loneliness and spiritual emptiness she felt after the loss of her husband and father.   [...]  [13] Reasonableness review is an approach meant to ensure that courts intervene in administrative matters only where it is truly necessary to do so in order to safeguard the legality, rationality and fairness of the administrative process.   [...]  [36] Counsel for the applicant confirmed at the hearing that Ms Li does not argue that she was not given a fair opportunity to answer or did not understand the questions posed to her.

Lukács v. Canada (Transportation Agency) - 2016 FCA 220 - 2016-09-07

[16] As recently stated by this Court in Lukács v. Canadian Transport Agency, 2016 FCA 202 at paragraphs 31-32, the Act does not create a general obligation for the Agency to deal with each and every complaint regarding compliance with the Act and its various regulations.   [...]  In a similar vein, the Supreme Court recognizes the importance of the particular statutory regime and the procedural choices made by the administrative body itself when it comes to determining the content of the duty of fairness (Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817 at paras. 24 and  [...]  To the extent that courts have exhibited a tendency to impose court-like procedures on administrative bodies in the context of judicial review for breach of procedural fairness obligations in the wake of Baker, they have often been met with criticism (see, for example, David Mullan, “Tribunal Imitating Courts – Foolish

Arsenault v. The Queen - 2015 TCC 179 - 2015-07-13

(c) another person with whom the transferor was not dealing at arm’s length,   [...]  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

Molnar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 273 - 2015-03-04

[11] The Board cited this Court’s instruction that “efforts concerning state protection must have actually translated into adequate state protection.” It stated “a fair reading” of the documentary evidence showed that criticism of the situation of Roma in Hungary was warranted, especially compared to other EU countries, but  [...]  [13] Finally, the Board concluded that after a “fair reading” and based on the totality of the evidence, although there is evidence to indicate that the police still commit abuses against people, it is reasonable to expect authorities to take action in these cases, that the police are both willing and capable of protecting   [...]  It argues that the decision taken together has to provide the Court with a basis for understanding why the decision at issue was made and it is an error only if there is a failure to deal with contrary evidence where it suggests a lack of consideration.

Ibrahim v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2014 FC 837 - 2014-09-02

If torture is a real possibility, then the information and advice that is intended to be relied on must be provided as well as the opportunity to respond in writing in order to meet the duty of fairness (Suresh v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2002 SCC 1, [2002] 1 SCR 3 at para 127 [Suresh]).   [...]  [14] Finally, the Respondent submits that adequacy of reasons is no longer considered to be an aspect of procedural fairness or a stand-alone basis for quashing a decision.   [...]  He found that the officer did not need to deal with credibility on the facts of this case because she found the evidence the applicant put forward was insufficient to establish the risk he claimed to face in the future.

Matingou-Testie v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2012 FC 389 - 2012-04-03

Moreover, since the evidence was not aimed at showing a breach of procedural fairness, it did not meet the requirement established by this Court’s jurisprudence regarding the exceptional circumstances in which new evidence can be included in an application for judicial review.   [...]  It is well settled that, as a general rule, the RPD, like any other administrative tribunal, has the discretion to allow or dismiss an application for an adjournment to submit new evidence, provided it complies with applicable principles of procedural fairness.   [...]  [43] I agree with the respondent that in the absence of an application duly made under Rule 44 of the RPD Rules (i.e. including a copy of the document to be submitted as evidence), and in light of the particular circumstances of this case, the RPD did not have a legal duty to deal with the application.