Search - стрим ешмек шешу

June 9, 1944 106 $ 4,500.00 Mun. of John LePage Assiniboia II. Dec. 14, 1944 154 $ 2,988.20 North John LePage Kildonan III. May 9, 1945 149.7 $ 6,680.00 Assiniboia Minnie LePage IV. Nov. 19, 1950 403 $12,896.00 North John LePage Kildonan V. ... LePage by having the lands farmed under crop leases.-... ‘ In March of 1956 the company decided to sell sufficient land to pay off the debentures and promissory notes. ...

“Was I correct in holding that the Toronto General Trusts Corporation are a ‘person’ within the meaning of such word as used in the phrase ‘and to the amount of $1,500 in the case of all other persons’ as they appear in subsec. 22 of sec. 4 of the Assessment Act, namely:— “ ‘22. ... That Court reversed the judgment ([1934] O.W.N. 269) and held that the answer to the first question should be " ‘No’’. ... On the other hand, in subsees. 16 and 18 of sec. 4 of the same statute, the phrase ""derived by any person from His Majesty’s Imperial Treasury’’ is used to qualify officers ’ pay and pensions, salaries, etc.; and "‘income derived’’ is used in relation to the income which comes to a farmer from his farm. ...

These are the facts stated by a Judge of the County Court of the County of York pursuant to the provisions of sec. 84 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1927, c. 238, and amendments thereto, on an appeal by the appellant to the Court of Appeal for Ontario from the judgment of the County Judge who confirmed an assessment by the respondent for ‘ business assessment’’ on the secondly described land and building. ... The sole question therefore is, whether or not the land and building used by the appellant for a garage and paint shop comes within the words ‘‘distribution premises ‘ ‘ in the amending statute. ... It is plain that the words of the statute ‘‘ point at some kind of special use of the premises’’, to use the words of Viscount Dunedin in the House of Lords in Sedgwick v. ...

On February 3, 1948, the defendant applied to the Master to rescind the praecipe order of December 14, 1946, and at the same time, the plaintiff applied to vary such order by adding after the name or style of the plaintiff the words "‘and administratrix with the will annexed of the said George Wellington Lunn. ’ ’ The second application was granted while the first was refused, the Master stating:— ‘“The evidence before the Court as to the manner in which Williamina D. ... , the reply was ‘‘ Well I am afraid so.’’ The letters of administration were thereupon filed and also an authenticated copy of the will. ... That paramount consideration is found in section 18(3) of the Succession Duty Act of the Province, which reads:— 1 " Unless the consent in writing of the Treasurer is obtained, no person (whether or not acting in any fiduciary capacity) shall deliver, transfer, assign or pay, or permit any delivery, transfer, assignment or payment of any chattel mortgages, book debts, promissory notes, moneys, shares of stock, bonds or other securities whatsoever (whether registered or unregistered) belonging to a deceased person, or in which such deceased person had any beneficial interest whatsoever, and which may be liable to duty in Ontario, or with respect to which there is a transmission within Ontario, whether such deceased person died domiciled in Ontario or elsewhere; provided that nothing contained in this subsection shall apply to any person when acting solely in the capacity of executor.”- From this it appears that in sending the notes out of Ontario as he did, the solicitor unwittingly violated the section. ...

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL Copyright — Liability of person pressing records from master disc prepared by a third party — Meaning of "make a record" — Infringement of copyright of owner — Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. ... Hutchinson & Co. (Publishers), Ltd., et al., [1936] 2 All E.R. 1496; Baschet v. ... Ricordi & Co., Inc. v. Columbia Graphophone Co. (1920), 270 F. 822; Edward B. ...

If profit, it is a fortuitous profit. ’ ’ He likens these securities in the hands of the respondent to timberlands held by a logging company, and rejects the view that in contrast to that situation, here there is a case of dealing in securities and that they are bought for resale. ... To sustaint the interest of patrons, the proprietor may be obliged to keep the collection revolving and in that way keep buying and selling pictures even though he has no desire to be a dealer and though he is ‘‘as likely to lose as to gain by his dealings, ’ ’ and he adds: “Similarly the appellant keeps securities not as a dealer but as an inducement to persuade clients to buy and to pay it commissions. ... But it is equally well established that enhanced values obtained from realisation or conversion of securities may be so assessable, where what is done is not merely a realisation or change of investment, but an act done in what is truly the carrying on, or carrying out, of a business. ’ ’ The part of the foregoing statement material to this discussion was quoted with approval by Duff, J. ...

The same construction results from a consideration of the French version of the text:— 1 ‘ et doit comprendre l’intérêt, les dividendes ou profits directement ou indirectement reçus de fonds placés à intérêt sur toutes valeurs ou sans garantie, ou d’actions, ou de tout autre placement, et, que ces gains ou profits soient partagés ou distri- bués ou non, et aussi les profits ou gains annuels dérivés de toute autre source, y compris. ’ ’ The distribution of the shares by Timberland was not a distribution of capital of that company. ...

. … (g) The terms “Irish enterprise” and “Canadian enterprise” mean respectively an industrial or commercial enterprise or undertaking carried on by a resident of Ireland and an industrial or commercial enterprise or undertaking carried on by a resident of Canada; and the terms “enterprise of one of the territories” and “enterprise of the other territory” mean an Irish enterprise or a Canadian enterprise, as the context requires. ... Solicitors for the respondent: Fasken & Calvin, Toronto.   ...

At the end of the year 1961 he resigned his partnership in the law firm Borden, Elliott, Kelley & Palmer and established a new firm under the name of Wahn, McAlpine, Mayer, Smith, Creber, Lyons, Torrance & Stevenson. ... In the latter, “income” was defined as meaning ‘‘the annual net profit or gain or gratuity,... ”. ... In such case, clause 17 of the agreement provides for a retiring allowance subject to the condition that he shall not in any way compete with the continuing partnership ’ ’. ...

& W. 171; and that being so, we are remitted to the considerations by which the shares are localized in the place where they may be effectually dealt with. ... & N. 339, 157 E.R. 140, and Brassard v. Smith, [1925] A.C. 371, as well as Erie Beach Co. v. ... & W. 171, as founded on a common principle, as did also Lord Gorell at pp. 38-9. ...