11,311 result(s)
-
1,901.
Horvat v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2003 FCT 262 - 2003-02-28
Federal Court Decisions[1] These reasons will deal with two related matters that were heard together. [...] There was no denial of procedural fairness in my view. Proof of Funds [...] [15] It is not necessary for me to deal with this issue in light of my decision on the reasons issue.
-
1,902.
Pidasheva v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1999-05-18
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, this decision deals only with docket IMM-637-98, which was heard following docket IMM-771-98. [...] Does the respondent have a duty to act fairly and consistently with the principles of fundamental justice when dealing with applications under the DROC regulatory provisions? [...] Does the respondent"s general duty of fairness toward refugee claimants continue when their case is the subject of an application for judicial review?
-
1,903.
Gordillo v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2019 FC 950 - 2019-07-18
Federal Court Decisions(f) there is a valid reason for not dealing with the subject-matter of the disclosure or the investigation. [...] [58] An issue of procedural fairness “requires no assessment of the appropriate standard of judicial review. [...] [59] The degree of procedural fairness to which disclosers under the Act are entitled at the stage of the Commissioner’s decision whether to investigate is at the lower end of the fairness spectrum.
-
1,904.
Kamara v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2024 FC 13 - 2024-01-04
Federal Court DecisionsThe reviewing court must adopt an attitude of restraint and intervene “only where it is truly necessary to do so in order to safeguard the legality, rationality and fairness of the administrative process” (Vavilov, at para 13). [...] In short, when the new information is not sufficiently different, novel and significant, there is no breach of the rules of procedural fairness if the RAD fails to give a claimant the opportunity to comment on it. [...] Tab 13, which deals with the issues of “Nationality, Ethnicity and Race” contains the same articles in both versions.
-
1,905.
9056-2059 Québec Inc. v. Canada - 2011 FCA 296 - 2011-10-25
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions138. Pour l’application de la présente partie, le bien ou le service dont la livraison ou la prestation peut raisonnablement être considérée comme accessoire à la livraison ou à la prestation d’un autre bien ou service est réputé faire partie de cet autre bien ou service s’ils ont été fournis ensemble pour une contrepartie [...] Nevertheless, when dealing with, as in the case bar [sic], individual goods that have absolutely nothing in common, this instantly raises a number of questions for the purposes of identifying what is primary as opposed to incidental. [...] [32] It is true that little enough of Canadian case law deals with the provision considered here.
-
1,906.
Esgenoôpetitj (Burnt Church) First Nation v. Canada (Human Resources and Skills Development) - 2010 FC 1195 - 2010-11-29
Federal Court DecisionsSince such an application is meant to be dealt with summarily, it is ordinarily more proper to deal with any objection to the application in the context of the hearing on the merits, if only because a full grasp of the facts and of the context will often be necessary to deal with the objection. [...] This is not a case in which the additional information would have been helpful to the Court in determining the jurisdictional or procedural fairness issues raised. [...] When dealing with a judicial review, it is not a matter of requesting the disclosure of any document which could be relevant in the hopes of later establishing relevance.
-
1,907.
Peck v. Parks Canada - 2009 FC 686 - 2009-06-30
Federal Court DecisionsI find the generic job description fairly describes in generic terms your work and responsibilities. [...] While dealing with Treasury Board as employer, its principles apply with equal force to Parks Canada: [...] [37] While dealing with the authority of Treasury Board as employer, Babcock applies equally to Parks Canada as employer.
-
1,908.
Xu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1999-06-15
Federal Court Decisions[22] Subsection 6(1) of the Act deals with the general principles of admissibility of immigrants. [...] [24] Section 8 of the Act deals with admissions to Canada and with general presumptions including burden of proof. [...] [32] I am completely satisfied that, in this case, the I.O. discharged her duties in accordance to law and was fair in the manner she proceeded.
-
1,909.
Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Nu-Pharm Inc. - 1998-10-16
Federal Court Decisions[12] I find it a bit difficult to deal realistically with these preliminary issues raised by the applicants. [...] A six-volume Applicants" Record and four days of argument are fairly good evidence of that. [...] Dealing with the "076 patent, Richard J. (as he then was) found that its essential feature was the product itself.
-
1,910.
Nwankwo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2023 FC 786 - 2023-06-06
Federal Court DecisionsWhether the RAD breached the Applicants’ right to procedural fairness in its assessment of the supporting affidavits. [...] [11] For issues of procedural fairness, the reviewing Court’s role is to determine whether the procedure was fair having regard to all of the circumstances: Canadian Pacific Railway Company v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FCA 69 at para 54; Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers v Canada (Immigration, Refugees and [...] The RAD drew negative credibility inferences from the PA and her mother’s explanations as to whether the lender tried to use legal action to recover the loan, why the lenders did not use the court system to deal with the default, and why the PA and her mother did not ask the authorities for help.
-
1,911.
Menzies v. The Queen - 2019 TCC 29 - 2019-01-25
Tax Court of Canada Judgments• 4) the extent of the liability is the amount by which the fair market value of the transferred property exceeds consideration tendered by the transferee, if any. [...] A is the amount, if any, by which the fair market value of the property....exceeds the fair market value at that time of the consideration given by the transferee for the transfer of the property.... [...] 2) The parties must not be dealing at arm’s length; 3) There must be no consideration or inadequate consideration flowing from the transferee to the transferor ....
-
1,912.
Kim v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 632 - 2008-05-21
Federal Court Decisions3. Did the officer breach procedural fairness in failing to provide the applicants with an opportunity to disabuse their concerns? [...] [5] In my view, it was an error in law for the immigration officer to have concluded that she was not required to deal with risk factors in her assessment of the humanitarian and compassionate application. [...] [30] I need not deal with the other issues raised by the applicants because of my finding on Issue 2.
-
1,913.
Hewitt v. Canada (Solicitor General) - 2005 FC 790 - 2005-06-01
Federal Court Decisions2. Did the failure to provide the applicant with the memorandum prepared by Officer Collette, dated October 24, 2003, constitute a breach of procedural fairness? [...] [18] The applicant further submitted that because of the seriousness of the report under subsection 44(1), a full and fair disclosure to allow rebuttal of perceived mischaracterizations, a failure to provide the information contained in the memorandum constitutes a breach of procedural fairness (see Andino v. Canada [...] [43] Because of my findings above, I will not deal with the other issue.
-
1,914.
Plattig v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2003 FC 1074 - 2003-09-17
Federal Court Decisions[17] The respondent submits that the Minister's delegate exercised his discretion in a fair and reasonable manner. [...] In the present case, the applicant failed to avail herself of the statutory processes to deal with the assessments for the taxation years at issue. [...] [42] Finally, the respondent also argues that subsection 152(4.2) of the Act was enacted to provide the Minister with some degree of flexibility and discretion in dealings with taxpayers who are unable to meet the statutory deadlines.
-
1,915.
Slau Limited v. Canada (National Revenue) - 2008 FC 1142 - 2008-10-08
Federal Court Decisions[7] The settlement and the Disposition for the 1988-1990 tax years did not deal with the issue of carry-back of non-capital losses from the 1991-1993 taxation years. [...] [37] The Disposition settled the tax liability for the 1988-1990 tax years, but did not deal with the issue of loss carry-back. [...] [41] The fairness decision under review dated July 6, 2006 (p.9, Applicant’s Record), states:
-
1,916.
Berhad v. Canada - 2004 FC 501 - 2004-04-05
Federal Court DecisionsSection IV below deals with the finding of liability, and Section V deals with damages. [...] I think it is fair to say that the answer to "when" is, "it depends". [...] I expected at the time that the subject matter experts would deal with it.
-
1,917.
Légaré v. The Queen - 2019 TCC 106 - 2019-05-09
Tax Court of Canada Judgments• c) a person with whom the person was not dealing at arm’s length, the following rules apply: [...] • d) the fair market value of the property transferred must exceed the fair market value of the consideration given by the transferee. [...] The question is whether the fair market value of the property transferred by Ms. Duchesneau was greater than the fair market value of the consideration given by the appellant.
-
1,918.
Mineiro v. The Queen - 2017 TCC 109 - 2017-06-16
Tax Court of Canada Judgmentsb) whether the appellant paid fair market value consideration on the date of transfer equal to or greater than the fair market value of the transferred property on the transfer date. [...] The amount the transferee may owe is limited to the amount 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. [...] A 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
-
1,919.
Gitxaala Nation v. Canada - 2015 FCA 73 - 2015-03-16
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[20] I accept that some standards in international law can bear upon procedural fairness. [...] However, for the most part, procedural fairness has been well-defined in cases such as Baker, supra. [...] Although not at all determinative, this does support the fairness of allowing it to intervene.
-
1,920.
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2010-167 and Broadcasting Order CRTC 2010-168 (Re) - 2011 FCA 64 - 2011-02-28
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[6] The Commission has concluded that the existing regulatory model does not adequately deal with recent changes to the broadcasting business environment. [...] (v) faire appel de façon notable aux producteurs canadiens indépendants; [...] On that basis, the BDUs argue that subsection 31(2) gives them a statutory right, akin to the user right under the fair dealing provision of the Copyright Act (see CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2004 SCC 13, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 339, at paragraph 48), to retransmit the local signal of a private local
-
1,921.
Hayden Manufacturing Co. v. Canplas Industries Ltd. - 1998-08-20
Federal Court Decisions5. Before requiring an answer to a discovery question, the court should weigh the probability of the usefulness of the answer against the time, trouble, expense and difficulty which might be involved in obtaining it: "One must look at what is reasonable and fair under the circumstances: . . . [...] [17] Question 263 deals with the trademark of another firm and that question was answered. [...] [18] Question 269 deals with the date of the sale or public knowledge relating to the same inlet valve.
-
1,922.
Delos Santos v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2010 FC 614 - 2010-06-07
Federal Court Decisions[10] The Applicant argues that the Officer made an unreasonable decision and further, that an issue of procedural fairness arises from the fact that the same officer decided this H&C application and his application for Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (“PRRA”). [...] The question of procedural fairness is reviewable on the standard of correctness. [...] [12] There is no inherent bias arising from the fact that one officer can deal with both a H&C application and a PRRA application.
-
1,923.
Blue Wave Seafoods Inc. v. Canada - 2006 FCA 81 - 2006-02-21
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[83] By 1997, the Appellants knew a great deal about silver hake fishery. [...] The process of the plant in dealing with such fresh fish was not extraordinary. [...] [6] Finally, with respect to the procedural fairness argument, there is nothing to add to the following comments of the Judge:
-
1,924.
Apotex Inc. v. Merck & Co. Inc. - 2002 FCT 1424 - 2002-01-03
Federal Court DecisionsGenerally speaking, the burden rests on the defendant of showing that the particulars furnished by the reply do not at least give him some fair idea of the outline of the case made out against him so that he can properly plead thereto. [...] However, in my view, Apotex does not have to deal with this defence at the present time since Merck has not filed a statement of defence. [...] Merck does have a fair outline of Apotex's case. Furthermore, much of the legislative history of this matter has been set out in Merck & Co. v. Minister of Health (1998), 79 C.P.R. (3d) 57 (F.C.T.D.).
-
1,925.
Tigney Technology Inc. v. Canada - 1999-08-03
Federal Court Decisions[2] The application of Tigney Technology Incorporated ("Tigney") involves an interesting and fairly narrow point as to whether there may be a reassessment under the Excise Act . [...] In response to that motion, Tigney, instead of filing a motion record as required by Rule 365, filed a document called an application record, which while dealing with the claim as a whole, also expressly touches upon the allegation of time bar and here I refer to pages 40 through 42 of the record, being a portion of the [...] In the present instance, the application deals with an interesting and narrow point which ought to be and can be decided fairly easily.