Advanced Search

Bashir v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2020 FC 278 - 2020-02-20

The minutes of settlement are confidential, but both parties agree that the provisions dealing with liability and release may be made public.   [...]  [13] The CDS dismissed both of Mr. Abdi’s grievances, finding that he was treated fairly in accordance with applicable rules, regulations and policies.

Augustin v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FC 55 - 2018-01-19

Do the reasons for the decision breach the principles of procedural fairness?   [...]  (i) a provision of a statute or regulation, or of a direction or other instrument made or issued by the employer, that deals with terms and conditions of employment, or

Kahsay v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2017 FC 116 - 2017-01-30

In some cases, the Court applies a correctness standard because the matter is viewed as a matter of procedural fairness, while in others the reasonableness standard is applied on the basis that the appropriateness of holding a hearing in light of a particular context of a file calls for discretion and commands deference   [...]  [21] The Applicant also suggested that, as the RPD did not deal with risk but only decided on the basis of identity, she should have been entitled to an oral hearing.

Bouchard v. Canada - 2016 FC 983 - 2016-08-29

The Statement of Claim consists of 41 paragraphs of allegations and a prayer for relief, all set out in 5 fairly densely typed pages.   [...]  [31] Finally, since the Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment was dismissed by Order dated July 20, 2016, I need not deal with paragraphs 37 to 49 of the Crown’s written representations.

Moradi-Zirkohi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2016 FC 463 - 2016-04-22

[9] If the appeal raises issues of procedural fairness, the standard of correctness applies (Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Khosa, 2009 SCC 12, at paragraph 43, [2009] 1 SCR 339).   [...]  Evaluating allegations this serious on the sole basis of the applicant’s memory, which is often biased because the citizenship application was rejected and was recorded in an affidavit sworn several months after the fact, does not seem to me to be the best way to deal with this kind of issue.

Cessa Mancillas v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2014 FC 116 - 2014-02-04

[10] Furthermore, the applicants do indeed face a generalized risk for the purposes of sub-paragraph 97(1)(b)(ii) of the IRPA because it is a risk faced by anyone living in Mexico, a country that is dealing with a serious crime problem.   [...]  The same can be said of this case, given that the evidence in the record does in fact state that extortion is a fairly common practice in Mexico that is not targeted at anyone in particular.

Tuccaro v. The Queen - 2013 TCC 300 - 2013-09-23

[1] This is a motion by the Respondent under Rule 53(a) and (c) of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) to strike certain provisions of the Appellant’s Notice of Appeal on the basis that they constitute an abuse of process and/or will delay a fair hearing of the matter.   [...]  These facts are possibly relevant to customary native activities and dealings on the reserve.

Pargelen v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2012 FC 921 - 2012-07-20

[12] The Supreme Court is leaning more and more to the proposition that deference is owed to decision makers dealing with points of law pertaining to their home statute (Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v Alberta Teachers’ Association, 2011 SCC 61, [2011] 3 SCR 654).   [...]  Il doit s’agir d’une condition que le délinquant peut respecter et que l’agent de libération conditionnelle peut surveiller et faire appliquer.

Bowden v. Canada - 2011 FCA 218 - 2011-06-29

In my view, that is a fair interpretation of the Minister’s pleading.   [...]  In view of the fact that the amount of tax involved is less than $5,000, I have concluded that the interests of justice would be best served by dealing with the merits of appeal in this Court.

Canada (Attorney General) v. Garrah - 2010 FC 1192 - 2010-11-26

[3] The respondent’s grievance raised a fairly simple question about the time value of a designated paid holiday taken by an employee working on a modified schedule under the collective agreement signed on June 26, 2009 between the Treasury Board and the Union of Canada Correctional Officers – Syndicat des agents   [...]  Had the parties intended for one sole regime for employees on modified hours of work and employees who do not work modified hours, they would not have set up two parallel articles dealing with the value of a statutory holiday.

Syrydiuk v. The Queen - 2010 TCC 520 - 2010-10-15

While the Income Tax Act legislation can and is interpreted in a fair and equitably manner, the Court cannot change the law.   [...]  Instead of being a clear benefit, it gave rise to liability and, as an economic matter, it forced him to pay in taxes a great deal more than he would have paid for a watch in the first place.

Liu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2010 FC 819 - 2010-08-13

In Moonsammy, although the applicant was rescued from his kidnappers by the police, there was evidence that there had been “rather profound lapses in the police response to his kidnapping” and his family had received no “support or guidance from the police on how to deal with the kidnappers during ransom negotiations.”   [...]  [25] Whether the Board breached procedural fairness by providing inadequate reasons is a question of law reviewable on the correctness standard.

Duri v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2010 FC 125 - 2010-02-08

(3) La Section accueille la demande soit sur preuve du manquement à un principe de justice naturelle, soit s’il est par ailleurs dans l’intérêt de la justice de le faire.   [...]  Rule 53 is a regulatory provision that deals with the reinstatement of a withdrawn claim or application.