Advanced Search

Betancour v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2009 FC 767 - 2009-07-27

This is to be contrasted with paragraph 101(2)(a) which deals with inadmissibility by reason of a conviction in Canada.   [...]  S’il ne peut le faire, il en donne la raison et indique quelles mesures il a prises pour s’en procurer.   [...]  So that provides fairly serious reasons to consider that he is the person named in this report.

Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Feerasta - 2009 FC 575 - 2009-06-02

b) obtient ou utilise le certificat d’une autre personne en vue de se faire passer pour elle;   [...]  c) permet sciemment que son certificat soit utilisé par une autre personne pour se faire passer pour lui;   [...]  The Judge’s failure to deal with the misrepresentations constitutes an error of law.

Canada v. Design Services Ltd. - 2006 FCA 260 - 2006-07-21

In the alternative, the respondents contended that the terms of the Request for SOQ and RFP extended an implied contractual duty of fairness to them.   [...]  ... [66] In fact, the trial judge even acknowledged in Design Services at para. 15: "At both the SOQ and RFP stages, PWGSC had no direct dealings with any of the plaintiffs."   [...]  Finally, we note that Desjardins J.A. relied on two cases to support the view that a duty to treat all bidders fairly and equally has been recognized in the context of tort claims.

Canada (Attorney General) v. H.J. Heinz Co. of Canada Ltd. - 2004 FCA 171 - 2004-04-30

(2) Dans les cas où, à son avis, il existe des éléments de preuve touchant la perpétration d'infractions fédérales ou provinciales par un cadre ou employé d'une institution fédérale, la Cour peut faire part à l'autorité compétente des renseignements qu'elle détient à cet égard.   [...]  [20] The appellant further submits that limiting the participation of third parties to matters falling within subsection 20(1) is a question of fairness: otherwise, there would be two classes of third parties, i.e. those receiving notice under sections 27 and 28, who would be afforded the opportunity of raising section 20   [...]  [49] Consequently, although the issue raised before this Court in Siemens and before us was not raised before McKeown J. and, thus, he did not deal with that issue, the effect of his decision was that Siemens, a third party as defined in the Act, could, on a section 44 application, raise exemptions other than those found in

Chad v. The Queen - 2021 TCC 45 - 2021-07-29

(iv) contained conclusions of fact and mixed fact and law dealing with the ultimate issue before this Court.   [...]  Such an analysis is necessary, in any event, in order to deal with the Motion to strike out paragraph 5.1 and subparagraph 5.2(b) of the Second Amended Reply.   [...]  Balancing judicial finality, prudent use of judicial resources and fairness to the parties, the doctrine stipulates that a party may not relitigate an issue that was finally decided in a prior judicial proceeding between the same parties or those who stand in their places.

Misdzi Yikh v. Canada - 2020 FC 1059 - 2020-11-16

Further, the decisions deal with the lawfulness of the orders regarding the BIOT, and not with a positive duty to legislate.   [...]  [46] These are cases which deal with the Charter, not POGG; but the arguments transfer to the current argument of the Dini Ze’.   [...]  [48] Though the Dini Ze’ argued the sections of the Charter separately regarding justiciability, I will deal with them together.

Canada (National Revenue) v. Amdocs Canadian Managed Services Inc. - 2015 FC 1234 - 2015-10-30

Also included was an explanation that two of the requested entities were not included as one is not a separate legal entity (Amdocs Development, Guernsey) and one has had very minor dealings with ACMS (Amdocs UK Ltd);   [...]  Counsel for ACMS proposed that this hearing be deferred until ACMS had been given fair opportunity to consider and respond to the forthcoming clarification query.   [...]  In this case, we are dealing with the management fees charged by Amdocs Management Ltd to ACMS. The approach used is set out in a letter of July 10, 2015 from Amdocs Management Ltd:

Federation of Newfoundland Indians v. Canada - 2011 FC 683 - 2011-06-14

Rule114, dealing with representative proceedings, was repealed in 2002 but reinstated in 2007.   [...]  The basis for the order is the parties' agreement, not a judge's determination of what is fair and reasonable in the circumstances.   [...]  The many cases in the law report dealing with settlement releases may seem to have sharp edges but their thrust is that absent fraud, overreaching or some similar equitable consideration, the release must be given its due.

Public Service Alliance of Canada v. Canadian Federal Pilots Association and Attorney General of Canada - 2009 FCA 223 - 2009-07-02

These reasons deal with both applications and a copy will be inserted in both Court files (A-375-08 and A-383-08).   [...]  b) faire l’objet d’un recours judiciaire, notamment par voie d’injonction, de certiorari, de prohibition ou de quo warranto.   [...]  [20] The Board’s decision was rendered in response to an application by CFPA under section 58 of the PSLRA. However, section 57, which deals with the certification of bargaining units, is also relevant, as is section 70, which deals with post-certification reviews of the appropriateness of the bargaining units previously

Coastal Culture Inc. v. Wood Wheeler Inc. - 2007 FC 472 - 2007-05-02

The Registrar’s decision was appealed to the Federal Court, and the trial Judge did not deal with the issue of the insufficiency of the pleadings.   [...]  [58] Because of my finding on this issue, I need not deal with the other issues.   [...]  a) soumet au registraire, par voie d'affidavit ou de déclaration solennelle ou conformément à l'article 54 de la Loi, la preuve sur laquelle il s'appuie ou une déclaration énonçant son désir de ne pas le faire;

Thomas v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2024 FC 655 - 2024-05-09

The MGERC also provides the CDS with systemic recommendations, such as measures to increase fairness and transparency in the grievance process.   [...]  [29] In Vaughan, the Supreme Court held that while courts generally should defer to any legislative schemes that exist to deal with employment-related disputes, they nonetheless retain residual jurisdiction that may be exercised where the legislated process does not provide effective redress: Vaughan at paras 18–25.   [...]  (i) would fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class,

Natco Pharma (Canada) Inc. v. Canada (Health) - 2020 FC 788 - 2020-07-24

[73] Nonetheless, I am satisfied this passage is fairly read as Health Canada making the determination that Natco’s ANDS indirectly compared its drug to GENVOYA. I say this for three reasons.   [...]  While the distinction may admittedly be fine at times, I am satisfied Health Canada’s reasons are fairly characterized as the Attorney General proposed.   [...]  A new subsection 5(1.1) had been introduced to deal with this issue, but ultimately the Federal Court of Appeal determined that section 5(1) captured the situation: Merck & Co, Inc v Canada (Attorney General), 2000 CanLII 15094, 5 CPR (4th) 138 (FCA) at paras 30–37.

Sambaa K'e Dene First Nation v. Duncan - 2012 FC 204 - 2012-02-10

It is not based on the common law duty of fairness, however. Rather, it is a duty based on “a process of fair dealing and reconciliation that begins with the assertion of sovereignty and continues beyond formal claims resolution”: Haida Nation, above at para. 32.   [...]  [136] In fairness, regard must be had to the entirety of Ms. Pound’s answer.   [...]  [193] The SKDB and NBDB have provided Canada with a great deal of historical and other material supporting their respective claims and have clearly articulated these claims.