11,311 result(s)
-
2,126.
Hillcore Financial Corporation v. The King - 2023 TCC 71 - 2023-05-18
Tax Court of Canada Judgments(a) may prejudice or delay the fair hearing of the appeal; (b) is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious; [...] Fair market value [83] Subparagraphs 5.3, 27.103 and 28.23 refer to the fair market value of the work-in-progress sold by 4092325 Investments Ltd. to the Appellant. [...] [104] Firstly, I will deal with Schedule C. Schedule C is referred to in subparagraphs 27.32 and 27.33 of the Reply, which read as follows:
-
2,127.
Milner v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2024 FCA 4 - 2024-01-05
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[21] Before grappling with Ms. Milner’s various arguments, I shall first deal with the applicable standard of review. [...] [34] Before this Court, Ms. Milner raises two new arguments of procedural fairness. [...] It is therefore too late to argue that her right to procedural fairness has been breached.
-
2,128.
Nweke v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2017 FC 242 - 2017-02-27
Federal Court DecisionsThe Member concluded that there had been no breach of procedural fairness. [...] And, that the Applicant’s lack of credibility and failure to deal with the RPD with clean hands rendered his claim to be manifestly unfounded. [...] Was the duty of fairness breached as a result of the gap in the RPD hearing recording and transcript?
-
2,129.
Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Gilead Pharmasset LLC. - 2017 FCA 161 - 2017-07-24
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsAs a result, the narrative portions of these reasons are fairly summary as they are addressed to the parties who are already familiar with the factual and legal context. [...] I note that the judge found that “Dr Wnuk focused his career on the synthesis of nucleosides, including an extensive amount of time dealing with the fluorination of nucleosides.” [...] [47] Although dealing with the question of sufficiency of disclosure, analogy may be made to the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Teva.
-
2,130.
Liang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 541 - 2011-05-10
Federal Court DecisionsWould he think that it is more likely than not that [the decision maker], whether consciously or unconsciously, would not decide fairly? [...] Here is the deal. I can see just by looking at your face that I am right. [...] The first, deals with who mentioned the specific amount of money at issue first, Mr. Wu or the Officer.
-
2,131.
Slansky v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2011 FC 476 - 2011-04-19
Federal Court Decisionssimilar to the role of an investigator engaged to conduct interviews and make inquiries into complaints of human rights violations, or in the workplace where policies and protocols may exist to deal with complaints, to investigate sexual harassment or other allegations in a manner that is fair to all concerned. [...] [35] The Applicant notes that this case raises concerns about how the CJC deals with complaints against fellow judges. [...] It is in the public interest to ensure that decisions are made independently, free from political interference and with impartiality and fairness.
-
2,132.
VidAmour v. The Queen - 2009 TCC 414 - 2009-08-28
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsThe Appellant made reference to Burns v. R., [2006] 5 C.T.C. 2392, 2006 TCC 309, a decision of Justice F. Angers, where in dealing with subsection 160(1), he stated in paragraph 18 as follows: [...] 2) the transferor and transferee must not have been dealing at arm's length; [...] [20] Before dealing with the applicability of the doctrine of constructive trust, the question arises as to whether or not the Tax Court of Canada has jurisdiction to find a constructive trust.
-
2,133.
News v. Wahta Mohawks - 2000-05-12
Federal Court Decisions2) Did the Band Council, in deciding the Applicants" appeals, fail to observe the principles of natural justice, and additionally, did its ultimate decision lack procedural fairness? [...] One of the first orders of business for the new Chief and Council was to deal with the appeals of the sixty persons. [...] There is no breach of the principles of natural justice nor the requirements of procedural fairness in the matter before me.
-
2,134.
Farshid-Ghazi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1998-02-12
Federal Court Decisions[38] I will deal with each of these considerations. Danger to Public Assessment [...] [53] I also find that the requirements of fairness have been met in the "danger to public" assessment. [...] In such circumstances the requirements of fairness are minimal... Humanitarian Considerations
-
2,135.
Air Passenger Rights v. Canada (Transportation Agency) - 2020 FCA 155 - 2020-10-02
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsIt is noteworthy that in its Notice of Application, APR itself states the CTA's statements "purport [t]o provide an unsolicited advance ruling" as to how the CTA will deal with passenger complaints about refunds for pandemic-related flight cancellations. [...] 1. The central question in this appeal is when, if ever, courts have jurisdiction to review the decisions of religious organizations where there are concerns about procedural fairness. [...] Relief could then be sought in this Court if the complainant is not persuaded that they have received a fair hearing.”
-
2,136.
Mohamed v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 1006 - 2015-08-25
Federal Court Decisions83.03 Est coupable d’un acte criminel passible d’un emprisonnement maximal de dix ans quiconque, directement ou non, réunit des biens ou fournit — ou invite une autre personne à le faire — ou rend disponibles des biens ou des services financiers ou connexes : [...] a) soit dans l’intention de les voir utiliser — ou en sachant qu’ils seront utilisés — , en tout ou en partie, pour une activité terroriste, pour faciliter une telle activité ou pour en faire bénéficier une personne qui se livre à une telle activité ou la facilite; [...] He did not have the intention to support the LTTE, but is forced into it and finds out a year and a half later who he is dealing with.
-
2,137.
Jarvinen v. Ottawa (City) - 2007 FC 1078 - 2007-10-19
Federal Court DecisionsShe requested that the Commission now deal with her complaint as she was not satisfied with the outcome at arbitration. [...] 1. Did the Commission satisfy the requirements of procedural fairness in its dealings with the applicant? [...] [23] The applicant also submitted that the Commission breached the duty of procedural fairness by failing to consider all the evidence before it.
-
2,138.
Khatoon v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 89 - 2004-01-22
Federal Court DecisionsThey submitted a great deal of documentary evidence about the treatment of MQM members and associates, news reports related to the torture and killing of Mrs. Khatoon's brother and nephew, and information related to their refugee claims. [...] [22] The applicants' challenge to the H & C decision deals only with the rationale of the PRRA officer in his risk opinion which was subsequently adopted by the immigration officer. [...] [33] Finally, although this issue was not pressed by applicants' counsel at the hearing, in my view, there was no denial of procedural fairness in this case, as the procedure outlined in Haghighi,supra, was followed.
-
2,139.
Singh v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2001 FCT 198 - 2001-03-19
Federal Court DecisionsThe Commission's Investigation Directorate shall deal with any complaints filed with it unless it appears to the Commission that: [...] Both parties agree that thoroughness is a component of procedural fairness to which the Commission must adhere. [...] How could HRDC rely upon a backlog to justify its treatment of the applicant when it hired 10 to 15 people at the same time to deal with that very issue?
-
2,140.
Corcovado Yacht Charters Ltd. v. Foreshore Projects Ltd. - 1998-02-09
Federal Court Decisions[4] While the law is fairly well settled as to the jurisdiction of the Court to deal with a case such as the present, there is no such thing as an unimportant case, from the point of view of the parties. [...] [9] Counsel agreed that in order to deal with the motion for documents and the oral motion for adjournment, they needed to present argument on the motion for a stay. [...] The courts and particularly the Supreme Court of Canada, have had a good deal to say as to what constitutes Canadian maritime law.
-
2,141.
Hamilton v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2016 FC 930 - 2016-08-15
Federal Court DecisionsAccording to the Director General, article 208.315, in combination with articles 208.05 and 203.04 dealing with overpayments, conferred discretion to cancel a direction to forfeit leave granted in error only if the error could be corrected and the CF member was otherwise entitled to the leave in accordance with the [...] In my view though the overarching issues boil down to: (1) whether the decision was rendered in a procedurally fair manner; and (2) whether the decision was reasonable. [...] The Applicant was not denied procedural fairness in the rendering of the Director General’s decision denying his grievance.
-
2,142.
Galati v. Harper - 2016 FCA 39 - 2016-02-08
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsThe former Court Challenges Programme was designed to deal with this imbalance but has been cancelled. [...] It is therefore unnecessary for me to deal with the argument as to constitutional entitlement as it does not arise on these facts. [...] The tie-in to the Constitution is that this collusion deprives the affected litigant of its constitutionally protected right to a fair and independent judiciary.
-
2,143.
Zhu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 980 - 2020-10-19
Federal Court DecisionsThe first issue deals with the Officer’s assessment of the evidence, and the second issue deals with whether the Officer has provided adequate reasoning to support the decision. [...] A decision-maker’s reasoning may affect both the substantive reasonableness and the procedural fairness of a decision (see Vavilov at para 81). [...] He argues that the Decision did not “meet the requirements of fairness” because the Officer did not provide any reasons for refusing the Applicant’s business experience, or why the Officer found such experience irrelevant.
-
2,144.
Sanchez Rebaza v. Canada (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship) - 2019 FC 509 - 2019-04-24
Federal Court DecisionsThe applicant submits, however, that the IAD did not comply with the rules of procedural fairness by ignoring the documentary evidence submitted in support of his application for an extension of time. [...] [29] To persuade me to agree with him, the applicant submitted a number of IAD decisions dealing with extensions of time. [...] [30] In sum, the IAD’s decision has qualities that make it reasonable since the applicant did not, among other things, succeed in credibly justifying the significant delay in filing his appeal with the IAD and the rules of procedural fairness were not violated.
-
2,145.
Zhu v. The Queen - 2015 TCC 16 - 2015-01-20
Tax Court of Canada Judgments[9] First, this Court does not have the authority to give relief simply on grounds of fairness or equity. [...] The Reply refers to subparagraph 115(1)(a)(ii) which deals with income. [...] The correct reference is paragraph 115(1)(c) which deals with losses.
-
2,146.
Toyota Tsusho America Inc. v. Canada (Canada Border Services Agency) - 2010 FC 78 - 2010-01-22
Federal Court DecisionsFurthermore, while the striking out of a pleading may save the parties and the court a great deal of resources that would otherwise be wasted on futile discovery and trial, given the summary procedure governing applications for judicial review, those savings are not achieved by striking out a notice of such an application. [...] Indeed, as the Federal Court of Appeal pointed out in Addison & Leyen Ltd. v. Canada, 2006 FCA 107, [2006] 4 F.C.R. 532, (reversed on other grounds by Canada v. Addison & Leyen Ltd., 2007 SCC 33, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 793) at par. 5, “it is generally more efficient for the Court to deal with a preliminary argument at the [...] [23] Finally, I would add that the applicant is wrong to claim that the statutory appeals scheme would leave it unable to make the arguments regarding procedural fairness which it proposes to raise on judicial review.
-
2,147.
Kennedy v. Canadian National Railway Company - 2009 FC 438 - 2009-04-30
Federal Court Decisions[3] In June of 2002, an investigator’s report recommended that the Commission deal with the Complaint. [...] In November of 2003, the Commission decided to deal with the Complaint. [...] That decision established the rules of procedural fairness applicable to the work of University Examinations Committees when they make credibility findings.
-
2,148.
Gainer v. Export Development Canada - 2008 FC 904 - 2008-07-24
Federal Court Decisions1. Whether there had been a breach of procedural fairness in the failure to conduct the investigation in a thorough and neutral manner; [...] In my view, the implementation of Court decisions dealing with the application of the Act is within the expertise of the Commission. [...] In my view, this issue was raised as a fairness question before Justice von Finckenstein and he ruled that a lack of fairness had not been shown because “...There is no indication or allegation that counsel interfered with the investigation” (see paragraph 29).
-
2,149.
Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Shwaba - 2007 FC 80 - 2007-01-25
Federal Court Decisions[10] It is by now well established that the duty of procedural fairness requires, in certain circumstances, that reasons be provided by administrative authorities. [...] [11] In the present case, it is not necessary to go through the factors that have been considered relevant to determining the content of the duty of fairness. [...] The only document dealing with the situation of homosexuals listed in the Board’s Information Package (footnoted in the third paragraph of the Board’s reasons) is ten years old.
-
2,150.
Iqbal v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 1388 - 2005-10-12
Federal Court Decisions[3] Given my conclusion that the PRRA officer breached his duty of fairness, there is no need to identify or address the other issues raised by the applicants. [...] [16] Like Harrington J. in Matondo, supra, I find that coming to a different conclusion would be paying lip service to the right of these applicants to have fair consideration of their submissions. [...] [18] A breach of procedural fairness can only be overlooked if there is no doubt that it had no material effect on the decision.