Search - отримати ешмек шешу

Marsh & McLennan, Ltd., [1984] F.C. 609; [1983] C.T.C. 231; 83 D.T.C. 5180 at 244 (D.T.C. 5191; F.C. 627), Clément, D.J.; Golden v. ...

.: — It was agreed at the commencement of the hearing that these cases would proceed on common evidence. ...

Ouellette & Brett (supra). Later, he concluded as follows at page 2054 (D.T.C. 354): Accordingly, I find that the point at issue, as in In re Spiral et al. v. ...

The transfer of the shares of Mount Royal Paving & Supplies Limited to the trustee was, in my opinion, a colourable gift and not a bona fide disposition of the type which s.5(1) is intended to exempt. ...

Hays v Pacific Mail SS Co, 17 How 596; St Louis v Ferry Co, 11 Wall 423; Morgan v Parham, 16 Wall 471; cf Ayre & Lord Tie Co v Kentucky, 202 US 409. ...

On September 28, 1973, Underwood McLellan & Associates Ltd wrote Carburn Aggregates, giving their engineering report on existing proposed developments of the Carburn Angus Pit which included the Ogden pit. ...

The difference was explained in the following terms: [TRANSLATION] Q. [...] ...

., in conformity with Stubart, was careful to qualify the importance of a bona fide business purpose by stating that, although it "... is not determinative of the artificiality of the deduction”, it “is certainly relevant”. ...

. … The words “prevent” and “prévenir” mean the same: to stop an event from happening before it happens. ...

Robertson J.A. categorized the reported cases into two categories: those that deal with “inside directors” and those that deal with “outside directors” At page 263 (5416-17), he states: [...] it is difficult to deny that inside directors, meaning those involved in the day-to-day management of the company and who influence the conduct of its business affairs, will have the most difficulty in establishing the due diligence defence. ...