11,312 result(s)
-
2,326.
Nguyen v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1999-01-05
Federal Court DecisionsThis may be easy in some cases where the decision is patently perverse, as dealing with matters outside the jurisdiction of the decision-maker, or explicable only on the assumption of bad faith. [...] As regards procedural fairness, Mr. Justice Strayer held as follows at page 678: [...] I believe it is fair to assume that the requirements of "natural justice" are subsumed under the general category of "fairness", particularly in respect of an administrative decision such as this.
-
2,327.
Michon-Hamelin v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2007 FC 1258 - 2007-11-29
Federal Court DecisionsBecause a decision not to deal with the complaint will summarily end a matter before the complaint is investigated, the Commission should only decide not to deal with a complaint at this stage in plain and obvious cases... [...] If it is not plain and obvious to the Commission that the complaint falls under one of the grounds for not dealing with it under section 41, the Commission should, with dispatch, proceed to deal with it. [...] [26] In light of the fundamental flaws identified in both the Commission’s section 7 and section 10 analyses, it is not necessary to address Ms. Michon-Hamelin’s arguments relating to the errors in the Commission’s accommodation analysis or her procedural fairness arguments.
-
2,328.
Hoechst Marion Roussel Canada Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2005 FC 1552 - 2005-11-17
Federal Court Decisions[18] The Board addressed the second part of the Applicant’s motion, dealing with allegations set out in paragraphs (5) and (8), in a separate hearing. [...] The Court’s relative expertise to that of a tribunal is greater when dealing with questions of procedural fairness, as these are questions of law. [...] The decision under review deals with a direct challenge to the Board’s statutory jurisdiction relative to Nicoderm as a patented medicine.
-
2,329.
Paranych v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2018 FC 158 - 2018-02-09
Federal Court DecisionsThe first relates to the reasonableness of the decision, and the second is a question of procedural fairness. [...] [11] The procedural fairness issue rests on the affidavit evidence of Mr. Paranych. [...] This Court in Yang did not provide further analysis of the appropriate mechanism for dealing with this alleged violation.
-
2,330.
Azubuike v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2014 FC 34 - 2014-01-13
Federal Court DecisionsRather, he is challenging the nature of the process carried out by the respondents in arriving at a decision (that is, to vacate his status), which brings up questions of procedural fairness. [...] Procedural fairness is reviewable on a correctness standard, as stated by the Supreme Court in Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v Khosa, 2009 SCC 12, [2009] 1 SCR 339 at paragraph 43. [...] This Court can no more ignore section 82.1 in dealing with an application under section 28 seeking to set aside a decision or order made under the Immigration Act than, for example, it can ignore the privative provisions of subsection 22(1) of the Canada Labour Code in dealing with a section 28 application seeking to set
-
2,331.
Khedri v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2012 FC 1397 - 2012-11-30
Federal Court DecisionsMoreover, in the guide “ENF 2: Evaluating Inadmissibility,” under Tab 9.2, which deals with the nature of misrepresentation, explicit reference is made to two elements. [...] [28] To conclude, the ID fairly interpreted paragraph 40(1)(a) of the IRPA. In fact, it considered the two lines of authority that deal with the element of intent in the administration of paragraph 40(1)(a) and concluded that the facts arising from the applicant’s situation were not analogous to those in Osisanwo, supra, [...] It was fair, in the circumstances, to expect that the applicant submit more probative evidence to rebut the evidence submitted by the respondent.
-
2,332.
Canada (Canada Customs and Revenue Agency) v. Sherman - 2006 FC 192 - 2006-02-13
Federal Court DecisionsThe process provided for an independent, expedited and fair hearing of CCRA human resources complaints. [...] Without reviewing this past medical documentation, Dr. Chernin could not fairly determine whether or not there was evidence that would have allowed the department to return to work, with or without accommodation. [...] [14] Counsel for CCRA was candid in acknowledging that the Board had jurisdiction to deal with the Respondent's three grievances.
-
2,333.
Xu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 1575 - 2005-11-21
Federal Court Decisions1. Did the IAD fail to observe a principle of procedural fairness by not providing the Applicant with the tribunal record? [...] Issue #1: Was there a breach of procedural fairness? [6] The Respondent concedes that there was a breach of procedural fairness in this case. [...] However, the second interpretation likely results in a process that would not only be legally appropriate, but would be an efficient and effective way of dealing with appeals.
-
2,334.
Ozvald v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 1250 - 2004-09-15
Federal Court DecisionsAt the same time, the Board must be accorded the trust in its careful and fair dealing with the cases that come before it for section 15(1)(b) relief that its status as an independent Court of Record demands. [...] [17] Third, it is not fair to say as counsel for the applicants put it the tribunal ignored evidence of state complicity at the hands of the police. [...] The applicants proposed a certified question related to the IFA. Since I was not required to deal with the IFA, no certified question flows from my decision.
-
2,335.
Gazaille v. The Queen - 2001-04-12
Tax Court of Canada Judgments6 It is agreed that Amalgamated 99, 78 Canada and 79 Canada did not deal with each other at arm's length during all material times. [...] The McClurg case was not concerned with section 160 but rather with subsection 56(2) dealing with the payment or transfer of property pursuant to the direction of or with the concurrence of a person for the benefit of the recipient. [...] Indeed, subsection 160(1) speaks of the "fair market value . . . of the consideration given for the property". . . .
-
2,336.
Michaud v. The Queen - 1998-08-13
Tax Court of Canada Judgments(c) a person with whom the person was not dealing at arm's length, the following rules apply: [...] (i) the amount, if any, by which the fair market value of the property at the time it was transferred exceeds the fair market value at that time of the consideration given for the property, and [...] [12] Section 160 lays down three conditions: the transferor must have had a tax debt at the time the property was transferred, the transferor and the transferee must not have been dealing at arm's length and the transfer must have been made without valuable consideration.
-
2,337.
Schut v. Canada (Attorney General) - 1996-10-02
Federal Court DecisionsThis decision was set aside a second time on procedural fairness grounds since the Commission did not have the appendices from the applicant's second submission before them at the time of the decision. [...] a) Making a decision in the absence of all relevant evidence, thereby breaching the principles of natural justice and fairness ? [...] Given my conclusions herein it is unnecessary to deal with the question of certification.
-
2,338.
United Wings Enterprise Inc. v. Qiu - 2012 FCA 144 - 2012-05-14
Federal Court of Appeal DecisionsThe claimant was in a very difficult situation – if she quit her job not only did she have to deal with the financial issues of not working, but her immigration status was put in limbo. [...] [7] Whether an administrative tribunal has breached procedural fairness by rejecting evidence depends on the circumstances of each case. [...] In these circumstances, I cannot conclude that the decision of the Board of Referees to exclude such emails denied the employer a fair hearing or otherwise constituted a breach of procedural fairness.
-
2,339.
Grenon v. The Queen - 2021 TCC 30 - 2021-04-27
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsI find that he has not addressed the facts with candour, fairness and honesty. [...] [485] Paragraph 150(1)(c) dealing with “trusts and estates” provides as follows: [...] [22] This items relates to the Corporate Appeals but I will nonetheless deal with it here.
-
2,340.
Sapru v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FCA 35 - 2011-02-01
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions[9] A response (Fairness Response) was provided to the Fairness Letter. [...] In the Procedural Fairness assessment the medical officer listed the additional documents she had reviewed in the Fairness Response. [...] The Judge’s conclusion was premised on the basis that the Fairness Letter gives an applicant “a fair opportunity” to respond to any concerns.
-
2,341.
Hauser v. Canada (Revenue) - 2007 FC 113 - 2007-02-01
Federal Court DecisionsAlthough we can empathise [sic] the difficulties you no doubt encountered in dealing with and recovering from these experiences, we cannot agree that there is evidence that the circumstances were so extraordinary as to prevent you from paying your taxes on time. [...] [12] Did the Minister discharge his duty to act fairly in exercising his discretion under subsection 220(3.1) of the Act to deny fairness relief to the Applicant? [...] In the circumstances, the Minister acted fairly and in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness as developed in administrative law.
-
2,342.
Thibault v. Canada (Director of Military Prosecutions) - 2020 FC 1154 - 2020-12-14
Federal Court Decisions[16] This decision will therefore only deal with the applicant’s motion for Military Judge Deschênes’s recusal. [...] [19] In this same document of November 20, 2020, the respondents deal directly with the motion to issue an interim writ of prohibition, arguing that none of the three prongs of the applicable test have been met. [...] They all deserve fair treatment and the same quality of justice to which anyone accused of an offence punishable by imprisonment aspires and is entitled.
-
2,343.
Piatka-Wasty v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2023 FC 1042 - 2023-07-31
Federal Court Decisions• [28]As well, Mr. Johnson deposed about his dealings with DFO regarding the Applicants’ dock. [...] D. Was there a breach of procedural fairness and/or natural justice? [...] • [162]Bias is an aspect of procedural fairness, dealing with the right of a person to get fair treatment in the context of administrative decision making.
-
2,344.
Princess Group Inc. v. Canadian Standards Association - 2009 FC 926 - 2009-09-17
Federal Court DecisionsHowever there has been considerable uncertainty as to how to deal with an official mark. [...] Had the CSA invoked it in 2007, or in its draft statement of claim in early 2009, then I believe it could fairly be said that Princess was on notice that its rights may be affected. [...] [21] It is only fair, right and proper that Princess be given a full opportunity to defend itself.
-
2,345.
Deigan v. Canada (Attorney General) - 1999-04-14
Federal Court Decisions[5] In my opinion all of these examples of alleged "improprieties" in the respondent's record concern comments made in summary of facts or argument on behalf of the respondent to deal succinctly with the issues raised by the application for judicial review. [...] The applicant may elect to deal with those matters orally, so long as they are relevant in the view of the hearing judge, but it is not helpful in judicial review proceedings, which are intended to be reasonably expeditious, to continue filing, in advance of the hearing, written submissions about the differences in the [...] If the supplemental record is not permitted it is urged the applicant will be denied a full and fair opportunity to have his case heard, and that the hearing Court will be deprived of a full understanding of the matters at issue.
-
2,346.
Wahba v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2024 FC 858 - 2024-06-06
Federal Court Decisions[5] The Applicant agreed that the Officer has considered all of what he had communicated to them, and therefore did not raise procedural fairness as an issue. [...] I find that the Applicant’s general frustration with the process or his disagreement with the legal criteria of each eligibility program to amount to a breach of procedural fairness, and I will therefore only deal with the reasonableness of the decisions. [...] [6] For reasons that follow, I find the Officer’s decisions for all three programs to be reasonable and reached without a breach of procedural fairness.
-
2,347.
Lamolinaire v. Bell Canada - 2012 FC 789 - 2012-06-20
Federal Court Decisions[26] In Canada (Attorney General) v Davis, 2009 FC 1104, [2009] FCJ No 1346 (Davis), Justice Harrington made the following observations with respect to the purpose of the Canadian Human Rights Act and the process of dealing with complaints: [...] However, if the Commission’s decision fails to observe the rules of procedural fairness or shows bias or lacks thoroughness, the Court may intervene. [...] The investigation was conducted in a fair, neutral and impartial manner and the investigator drew reasonable conclusions.
-
2,348.
Kinobe v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 845 - 2011-07-08
Federal Court DecisionsThe Officer breached the principles of natural justice or procedural fairness, first by not complying with the notice requirement in paragraph 168(a) of the IRPR which state that notice of the credibility hearing shall be provided to the applicant including “the issues of fact that will be raised at the hearing”. [...] [22] Counsel for the applicant submits the Officer also breached procedural fairness when dealing with the H&C application. [...] It is settled law that the question of a breach of procedural fairness does not engage a standard of review analysis.
-
2,349.
Melikyan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2009 FC 590 - 2009-06-05
Federal Court Decisions[2] What should be determined in this case is whether the panel breached its duty of procedural fairness by failing to provide adequate reasons for its decision. [...] [16] I agree that the standard of review applicable to questions of procedural fairness is correctness (Sketchley v. Canada (Attorney General), 2005 FCA 404, [2006] 3 F.C.R. 392). [...] [21] In Kifoueti v. Canada (M.C.I.) (1999), 164 F.T.R. 116, 89 A.C.W.S. (3d) 124, a case dealing with a change in circumstances, the Court held that the applicant could not be required to provide evidence she was not in a position to provide, since this infringed the fairness principle.
-
2,350.
Weatherill v. Canada (Attorney General) - 1998-01-23
Federal Court Decisions[14] Counsel for the applicant argues that this process is the only one which would ensure a complete, fair and impartial hearing to determine whether or not the applicant is fit to continue in office. [...] He refers, among other things, to procedural fairness, to improper delegation of authority, and to a lack of opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. [...] [29] Notwithstanding the foregoing observations, the best that I can do with the stay application before me is to deal with the applicant's grounds to establish an arguable case.