11,309 result(s)
-
10,001.
Merck & Co., Inc. v. Apotex Inc. - 2013 FC 751 - 2013-07-16
Federal Court DecisionsThese Reasons for Judgment deal with the quantum of damages to be paid to the Plaintiffs. [...] [31] In dealing with this issue, I have organized my analysis with regard to the following questions: [...] [215] I am not certain why this issue was not fully and fairly put to Apotex earlier.
-
10,002.
Thibodeau v. Greater Toronto Airports Authority - 2024 FC 274 - 2024-02-20
Federal Court DecisionsI will deal with both applications at the same time because a number of issues are common to both. [...] However, these signs were not part of Mr. Thibodeau’s complaint to the Commissioner and, as such, I cannot deal with them. [...] [27] Subsections 23(1) and (2) of the OLA deal with the duty of federal institutions that provide services or make them available to the travelling public.
-
10,003.
Sabitu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 165 - 2021-02-23
Federal Court DecisionsThe RAD must adjudicate claims as quickly as the circumstances and the considerations of fairness and natural justice permit. [...] The Chairperson identified the decision as one that offered sound analysis of the legal issues raised in such matters, and would assist other panels dealing with similar cases. [...] There are simply too many variables raised by two different issues affecting her procedural fairness that could not be properly be vetted before the RPD or RAD. Justice Near’s statement in El Kaissi at para 21 applies here that “[a] breach of procedural fairness inevitably occurs where the incompetence of counsel prevents a
-
10,004.
Katlodeeche First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2013 FC 458 - 2013-05-02
Federal Court DecisionsProcedural Fairness [85] In paragraphs 91-105 of KFN’s submissions it is argued that the Board breached rules of procedural fairness. [...] [87] For the above reasons, the AG submits that the Court must take it as settled that the Board’s process was fair. [...] When I examine the whole record, I find that adequate consultation has, in fact, occurred, but this does not mean that the Crown has accepted that every concern raised by KFN is justified and requires specific licencing provisions to deal with it.
-
10,005.
Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc - 2015 FC 875 - 2015-07-20
Federal Court Decisions[51] The portions of his affidavit that are relevant in this application deal with the issue of double patenting. [...] To be fair, both sides have at times confused the issue, and all four experts were instructed to consider the issue of double patenting as of July 14, 1995. [...] This concession is significant as much of the evidence of both parties’ experts in this case deals with prior art published before January 21, 1994.
-
10,006.
Jodhan v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2010 FC 1197 - 2010-11-29
Federal Court DecisionsMy browser was unable to read the English version; it stuttered to deal with the content. [...] The Court will first deal with the five examples presented by the applicant. [...] [181] Rule 400 of the Federal Courts Rules deals with the Court’s discretion to award costs.
-
10,007.
Chad v. The Queen - 2022 TCC 18 - 2022-01-21
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsUltimately it boils down to a consideration of simple fairness, common sense and the interest that the courts have that justice be done. [...] If the Crown will clearly say today, no, we are not dealing with the capital loss argument. [...] Now, the fifth issue, Your Honour, brought forward by the Appellant deals with two arguments of the Respondent.
-
10,008.
Rybakov v. The Queen - 2019 TCC 209 - 2019-10-04
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIt is limited to a reassessment or additional assessment that deals with a matter addressed in a notice of objection for an assessment that has been served or appealed to the Court. [...] No such provision is made in that Act to deal with failure of the Crown’s representative to appear. [...] Procedure exists to help promote fair, just and correct resolution of disputes and an irregularity should not result in the setting aside of a proceeding unless, and then only as necessary, in the interests of justice.
-
10,009.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Ader - 2017 FC 838 - 2017-09-25
Federal Court Decisions[87] I would like to thank counsel for the Attorney General and the amicus, Mr. Carter, for their commendable efforts and diligence in dealing with this Application. [...] [...] [...] Protection of right to a fair trial Protection du droit à un procès équitable [...] Page 22 first occurrence “is dealing with”; 3. Page 23 all section 38 claims;
-
10,010.
Blossman Gas, Inc. v. Alliance Autopropane Inc. - 2022 FC 1794 - 2022-12-23
Federal Court DecisionsWith respect to the slogan, while POWERED BY PROPANE may be considered suggestive of the services offered, the particular phrasing nonetheless has a degree of distinctiveness, such that the mark as a whole has a fairly high degree of inherent distinctiveness. [...] It argues that the language dealing with termination focuses on the use of the word AUTOGAS, and implicitly permits the use of the word ALLIANCE after expiry of the agreement, provided it is not used in association with the word AUTOGAS. [...] [118] Paragraph 18(1)(e) is a fairly new provision, having come into force on December 13, 2018: Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No 2, SC 2018, c 27, s 218.
-
10,011.
David Suzuki Foundation v. Canada (Health) - 2019 FC 1637 - 2019-12-18
Federal Court Decisionsb) soit obliger le titulaire à faire le rappel du produit et à procéder à sa disposition de la manière qu’il précise; [...] b) soit obliger le titulaire à faire le rappel du produit et à procéder à sa disposition de la manière qu’il précise; [...] Mesures pour faire observer la loi Inspector may order measures Mesures requises par l’inspecteur
-
10,012.
Sanofi-Aventis v. Apotex Inc. - 2013 FCA 186 - 2013-07-24
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsFor the purposes of readability, I will deal with the analysis of the issues of validity and then deal with the issues of infringement separately. [...] We must look to the whole of the disclosure and the claims to ascertain the nature of the invention and methods of its performance, (Noranda Mines Limited v. Minerals Separation North American Corporation ([1950] S.C.R. 36])being neither benevolent nor harsh, but rather seeking a construction which is reasonable and fair to [...] I would return the matter to the Federal Court to deal with the issue of remedies and award Sanofi its costs, to be assessed, both in this court and in the Federal Court.
-
10,013.
Wappen-Reederei GMBH & CO. K.G. v. Hyde Park (Ship) - 2006 FC 150 - 2006-02-07
Federal Court DecisionsThis appears somewhat different than what is reflected in the Commission's report and some of the decisions dealing with this issue.[4] Mr. Kinsman does not indicate on what basis he came to that conclusion. [...] I note as well that in the federal legislative context, this Court's preferred approach is buttressed by s. 12 of the Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-21, which provides that every enactment "is deemed remedial, and shall be given such fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation as best ensures the [...] This is how a party deals with documents or information protected by another type of statutory privilege or by common law privilege such as solicitor-client privilege.
-
10,014.
Henry-Okoisama v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2024 FC 1160 - 2024-07-23
Federal Court Decisions[35] Thus, despite some revisions (including the subsequent implementation of IRPA in 2002) over the past 23 years of jurisprudence that has flown under the bridge erected by Baker, Baker remains good law—particularly in the area of procedural fairness, but also on the H&C exemption. [...] [46] The Officer’s decision in this matter described section 25 of the IRPA as dealing with “extraordinary situations.” This is the same as finding that the Applicants have to prove that their circumstances were “exceptional” to warrant an H&C finding.
-
10,015.
Emergis Inc. v. The King - 2024 TCC 38 - 2024-03-18
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[8] In General Electric Capital Canada Inc., v. Canada, 2010 TCC 490, Justice Hogan explained that “the purpose of section 147 of the Rules [is] to give a judge the discretion to move away from the Tariff in order to provide fair and reasonable relief in the circumstances - with or without reference to Schedule II, Tariff [...] [58] In the interest of finality, the Court is inclined to deal with the matter without further submissions from the Respondent.
-
10,016.
Munir v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2024 FC 153 - 2024-01-30
Federal Court DecisionsIt 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. [...] As a result, it is unnecessary to deal with the other issues raised by the Applicant.
-
10,017.
Osborne v. The King - 2023 TCC 98 - 2023-07-13
Tax Court of Canada Judgments(4) he neither anticipated, expected nor suspected the dealings of Khan were fraudulent. [...] Further, the Minister is not held to a standard of treating one taxpayer the same as or less fairly than another.[2] Lastly, the Court reaffirms for the Osbornes that the liability for tax and penalties under the ITA, at issue before this Court, does not incorporate judgment for bad behaviour, or good for that matter.
-
10,018.
Banff Caribou Properties Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2023 FC 312 - 2023-03-06
Federal Court DecisionsLe ministre peut, en ce qui concerne un choix prévu par une disposition visée par règlement, proroger le délai pour faire le choix ou permettre la modification ou l’annulation du choix si les conditions suivantes sont réunies : [...] [32] The Applicant argued that the Tax Court in Terminal Norco failed to deal with what is at the heart of its submissions on this point.
-
10,019.
Elshafi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2023 FC 266 - 2023-02-24
Federal Court DecisionsIn my view, a reasonable and fair-minded person would judge the requirement that he leave Canada and go to a war zone where a dire humanitarian crisis prevails so that he could apply for permanent residence as a misfortune potentially deserving of amelioration. [...] [33] The Applicants submit that Kanthasamy requires decision-makers to go beyond merely stating that the BIOC have been considered; these interests must be “well identified and defined” and examined “with a great deal of attention”: at para 39.
-
10,020.
Crook v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2022 FC 1670 - 2022-12-05
Federal Court Decisions[18] The Guideline includes a section dealing with applicants providing proof of having $5,000 in income. [...] These reasons use as a translation the English version of the Guideline as reproduced in Aryan at para 33, which I am satisfied reasonably represents a fair translation of the French document.]
-
10,021.
Alrebeh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2022 FC 1389 - 2022-10-11
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, the Officer found that, given the seriousness of the potential consequences, the applicant should be expected to deal with her in-laws directly and, if necessary, to distance her son from them. [...] While I agree with the applicant that the Officer is not a physician and is not qualified to determine suitable treatment or medication options for Ali, in fairness to the Officer, the decision is responsive to the submissions advanced.
-
10,022.
Barrs v. Canada (National Revenue) - 2022 FCA 147 - 2022-08-19
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsThis will allow the Minister to comply with both the letter of and the spirit of fairness required by section 220(3.1) of the ITA. [...] However, as Belchetz did not deal with a claim for equitable treatment made by a taxpayer who sought relief in 2014, it does not decide whether the Federal Court erred in its assessment of this issue.
-
10,023.
Van Heest v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2019 FC 161 - 2019-02-07
Federal Court Decisions[12] The decision fairly summarises the various episodes in this sad story. [...] There are indications on this record that such inference was made at times, including when the Immigration Appeal Division made it an express condition of a stay of the removal order that the applicant continue to deal with his bipolar situation.
-
10,024.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Stewart - 2018 FC 768 - 2018-07-20
Federal Court DecisionsThe AD relied upon another case before the AD dealing with the same issues as those in Mr. Stewart’s case, and on this basis concluded that his case might be “arguable,” so the AD could not conclude that his case was bound to fail. [...] [38] Mr. Stewart for his part argues that the decision of the AD is fair and that his OAS benefits should be reinstated for the period of time they were withheld.
-
10,025.
Lichtman v. The Queen - 2018 TCC 82 - 2018-04-30
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[12] I will deal first with the Respondent’s request for party and party costs. [...] In using my discretion to order an adjournment, I was required to balance fairness to the parties under the somewhat unusual circumstances, against the underlying need to move forward as efficiently as possible with the conduct of the hearing, which had already commenced.