11,309 result(s)
-
1,001.
Brousseau Succession v. The Queen - 2012 TCC 390 - 2012-10-31
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[21] The appellant acquired her undivided share of the triplex from her father below the fair market value. [...] (a) where a taxpayer has acquired anything from a person with whom the taxpayer was not dealing at arm’s length at an amount in excess of the fair market value thereof at the time the taxpayer so acquired it, the taxpayer shall be deemed to have acquired it at that fair market value; [...] (i) to a person with whom the taxpayer was not dealing at arm’s length for no proceeds or for proceeds less than the fair market value thereof at the time the taxpayer so disposed of it,
-
1,002.
Duiker v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2023 FC 701 - 2023-05-19
Federal Court DecisionsAs a result, this judgment and reasons will deal with the general nature of the facts and issues, consistent with the various Orders. [...] [144] It is important to note that the right to refuse to work is not contingent on an employee having attempted to deal with OHS issues through means other than a work refusal. [...] While the precise content of the duty of fairness will vary depending on the circumstances, the decision-maker’s process must always be fair (Baker at para 22).
-
1,003.
Howlader v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 817 - 2005-06-14
Federal Court DecisionsWe are, therefore, facing a clear breach of procedural fairness which, given the importance and the relevancy of the documents appended to the motion, is sufficient for me to allow the application for judicial review and send the matter back to be reconsidered by a differently constituted panel of the Board. [...] This means that the RPD had to deal with the applicant's request. It could simply mention in its decision that, having reviewed the letter, it decided not to consider the evidence because of factors listed in Rule 37(3) or it could accept to consider the new evidence and deal with it in its decision. [...] The RPD simply failed to deal with this matter. A breach of procedural fairness can only be overlooked if there is no doubt that it had no material effect on the decision.
-
1,004.
Armoyan v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2004 FC 730 - 2004-05-19
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, after hearing this matter, it became clear that the only issue is whether the Commission erred or breached Mr. Armoyan's right to procedural fairness by not providing sufficient reasons for its decision. [...] This provision deals solely with a decision at the screening stage that the Commission will not deal with the complaint. [...] In the result, I conclude that the Commission did not fail to fulfil the duty of fairness incumbent on it by giving insufficient reasons.
-
1,005.
Makuz v. The Queen - 2006 TCC 263 - 2006-07-12
Tax Court of Canada Judgments• 85% of the property was sold for debt at fair market value to a third partnership. [...] The promotional material says that the unsold 79 units had a fair market value (“fmv”) of about US $23,000,000. [...] It seemed fairly obvious that Mr. Marco had not given a great deal of thought to the projections.
-
1,006.
Soullière v. Canada (Health) - 2017 FC 686 - 2017-07-17
Federal Court Decisions(1) Was the Commission’s Decision procedurally fair? [18] In my view, the Commission made no procedural error in coming to its decision. [...] [28] Nor do I accept Ms. Soullière’s contention that since CBS policies and procedures are essentially mandatory once approved, and may affect HC approval for future license eligibility, HC is necessarily a party to the discrimination, even without any direct dealings with Ms. Dewan. [...] [43] This Court has dismissed the judicial review in the companion matter T-690-15 on the basis of that decision of the Commission being reasonable and procedurally fair.
-
1,007.
Cooper v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2001 FCT 1329 - 2001-12-04
Federal Court Decisions[7] Section 120.1 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (the "Act") deals with calculation of parole eligibility dates where additional consecutive sentences are imposed. [...] Section 120.2 deals with calculation of parole eligibility where additional concurrent sentences are imposed. [...] Equity encompassing the notions of fairness, justice and predictability.
-
1,008.
Gauthier v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2017 FC 697 - 2017-07-18
Federal Court DecisionsI dismissed the Applicant’s motion at the outset of the hearing because the new evidence was not before the Commission when it made its decision and it did not relate to a breach of procedural fairness or natural justice by the Commission in rendering its decision. [...] In light of these findings, the Respondent says the Commission reasonably adopted the Section 40/41 Report’s recommendation to not deal with the complaint. [...] In my view, the Commission thoroughly reviewed the factors presented in this case in a fair and impartial manner.
-
1,009.
Rockport Developments Inc. v. The Queen - 2009 TCC 180 - 2009-05-04
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsEnbridge, he found, was very difficult to deal with. [39] The other appellants all became affected financially as a result. [...] [53] It is fair to say that it is not the legislator's intention to collect tax under the Act on an amount of consideration which has been subsequently reduced. [...] The Memorandum (fairness) and subsection 169(5) provide for an exemption from the documentation requirement.
-
1,010.
Sawridge Band v. Canada - 2005 FC 607 - 2005-05-03
Federal Court Decisions[105] This synopsis of what has led to the present motion shows that what the Court is asked to deal with is confined to a fairly narrow range of procedural matters related to the pre-trial period. [...] He [Russell J.] made a number of rulings on that day dealing with will-says and the fairness of treatment between the parties. [...] 187. Mr. Healey tried to remind the Court of its obligations to have regard for the Plaintiffs' rights and how the Plaintiffs have been fair in their dealing with the opposite side.
-
1,011.
Drazin-Bendheim v. The Queen - 2018 TCC 30 - 2018-02-12
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[9] The issue of the fair market value was eventually resolved but the parties were unable to agree on the proposed reassessment, as described above. [...] (a) may prejudice or delay the fair hearing of the appeal; a) peut compromettre ou retarder l’instruction équitable de l’appel; [...] (iii) is made as a consequence of a transaction involving the taxpayer and a non-resident person with whom the taxpayer was not dealing at arm’s length,
-
1,012.
Watson v. Canada - 2003 FC 1377 - 2003-11-21
Federal Court DecisionsHe observed that Mr. Watson had gained a fair amount of distance on him. [...] Mr. Watson then stopped his vehicle in the middle of the fairly narrow road. [...] While that is a generalization, it is a fairly universal concept, except in particular circumstances.
-
1,013.
Lessard-Gauvin v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2020 FC 730 - 2020-06-30
Federal Court DecisionsAlthough Hospira did not deal directly with the applicable test in these situations, the case law does establish that the test to be applied to such errors is the same as that applicable to errors of law, and that no deference is owed to prothonotaries on questions of procedural fairness (Housen at paras 8–9; G.D. Searle [...] Issues of procedural fairness and the duty to act fairly are not concerned with the merits or content of a decision rendered, but rather the process followed. [...] I will deal with them in that order. [51] After carefully reviewing the Prothonotary’s Orders, reading the records and analyzing the written and oral submissions of the parties, I conclude that Mr. Lessard-Gauvin has not demonstrated that the Orders contain an error of law, a palpable and overriding error of fact or mixed
-
1,014.
Cerescorp Company v. Marshall - 2011 FC 468 - 2011-04-15
Federal Court DecisionsIntervention is warranted only where it is clear that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter before it. [...] If the Commission wanted to make a determination on this issue on all the evidence before it, including the submissions from Cerescorp, then procedural fairness required that the Commission specifically deal with the issues raised in the submissions of Cerescorp. [...] 3. The aspect of the Decision that deals with possible systemic discrimination against women in the promotion process is remitted to the Commission for investigation by a different investigator acting in a procedurally fair manner and subsequent re-determination by the Commission; and
-
1,015.
Kemp v. Canada (Finance) - 2022 FCA 198 - 2022-11-21
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsPart I of the Act deals with Proscribed Discrimination. The prohibited grounds of discrimination are set out in section 3: [...] 4. Les actes discriminatoires prévus aux articles 5 à 14.1 peuvent faire l’objet d’une plainte en vertu de la partie III et toute personne reconnue coupable de ces actes peut faire l’objet des ordonnances prévues à l’article 53. [...] [8] Section 41 of the Act deals with the processing of complaints and was the trigger for the Commission’s decision in this case not to deal with Mr. Kemp’s complaint:
-
1,016.
Spidel v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2012 FC 958 - 2012-07-31
Federal Court Decisions[57] The Report went on to observe that “[t]he system has been ineffective in dealing with the chronic backlog of cases. [...] Tellingly, he says, the chapter of the manual dealing with the CSC grievance process included the phrase “Why Bother? [...] This new evidence also does not go to a question of either procedural fairness or jurisdiction.
-
1,017.
League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Canada - 2009 FC 647 - 2009-06-19
Federal Court DecisionsMoreover, it is inappropriate to put a great deal of emphasis on Mr. Odynsky’s personal interest in maintaining citizenship in order to maintain family ties. [...] Duty of Fairness [41] B’nai Brith argues that the GIC owed it a duty of fairness, at least to the extent of providing reasons for its decision. [...] At the centre of the fairness analysis was said to be a consideration of whether “those whose interests were affected had a meaningful opportunity to present their case fully and fairly”.
-
1,018.
Craib v. The Queen - 2005 TCC 434 - 2005-07-22
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsErrors happen and basic fairness flowing from Canadian traditions requires it is incumbent on anyone who makes a decision to make that decision fairly. [...] This is a fundamental failure of basic right to a fair hearing. Simply described - A fair hearing is not possible if an individual and their evidence could not be heard. [...] Sections 3 and 5 of the Income Tax Act deal with the inclusion of income during the year in which it is received.
-
1,019.
Persaud v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 31 - 2011-01-12
Federal Court Decisions[11] The essential issue in this case is how the Appeal Division is to deal with a decision of the Immigration Division once a finding has been made that a principle of natural justice had not been observed. [...] [13] In the present circumstances we are dealing with section 67(1)(b) which provides that, to allow an appeal, the Appeal Division must find that a principle of natural justice has not been observed. [...] In Administrative Law (6th ed. 1988), at p. 535, Professor Wade discusses the notion that fair procedure should come first, and that the demerits of bad cases should not ordinarily lead courts to ignore breaches of natural justice or fairness.
-
1,020.
Fischer v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2013 FC 861 - 2013-08-12
Federal Court Decisions[6] Sections 23, 24 and 27 of the CCRA deal with the collection and communication of relevant information: [...] However, the applicant generally questions the fairness of the whole grievance process. [...] [22] Issues of procedural fairness in the context of judicial review of decisions made in the course of the CSC offender grievance process, as well as issues dealing with the interpretation of legislation, are generally dealt with under the correctness standard of review: Kim v Canada (AG), 2012 FC 870 at para 32 [Kim];
-
1,021.
Jamshidi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2024 FC 627 - 2024-04-24
Federal Court Decisions[8] Instead, I dismiss the Applicant’s application as I find the Decision reasonable and I find no breach of procedural fairness. [...] [56] Whether or not the Court shall develop further protocols and rules to deal with non-appearances as a systemic issue is not for me to decide. [...] B. The Officer did not breach the duty of procedural fairness [58] The Applicant appears to raise three procedural fairness arguments.
-
1,022.
Island Timberlands LP v. Canada (Foreign Affairs and International Trade) - 2008 FC 1380 - 2008-12-17
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, if the offer is considered not to be “fair”, an export permit is generally granted. [...] Knowing that EXCOL was not currently capable of dealing with this application, we forwarded our application on a form 1718. [...] As a result, the strategy on how to deal with Island Timberlands’ application was taken up the line of decision-making to the Director General in the Minister’s office.
-
1,023.
CanXpress v. Reagan - 2003 FCT 739 - 2003-06-12
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, I gather that at the time CanXpress was not equipped to deal with such employee problems. [...] I propose to deal with them in the following order. 13. Did the adjudicator err in finding that the respondent had been unjustly dismissed? [...] Where the alleged errors concern questions of law, relate to a breach of procedural fairness, or deal with the jurisdiction of an adjudicator, then the applicable standard of
-
1,024.
Bonilla v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2001-01-12
Federal Court Decisions[27] I wish to deal with the issues as follows: 1. What is the standard of review to be applied in the review of the visa [...] This judicial review deals only with that part of the visa officer's decision which discusses subparagraph (b)(iii). [...] [34] I do not find it necessary to deal with Issue 4 as this issue was dealt with by my
-
1,025.
Sellathurai v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2010 FC 1082 - 2010-11-03
Federal Court DecisionsThe Applicant argues that s.38 of CEA is the only vehicle to deal with the Disputed Documents in this case. [...] IRPA contains a statutory scheme specifically designed to deal with the non-disclosure of information within the immigration context. [...] The Applicant submits that, in this case, considerations of fairness require the appointment of a special advocate.