Search - 2005年 抽纸品牌 质量排名

She was in Italy from April 14, 2010 to September 15, 2010; March 27, 2011 to June 1, 2011; and February 18, 2012 to April 15, 2012. [6]   Fang started receiving Old Age Security payments in 2005 after he met residency requirements and qualified under the terms of Social Security Agreement between Canada and Italy. [7]   The Applicant received payments from the Italian government from 2003 to 2012. ... VI.   Analysis A.   Did the Appeal Division made a reasonable finding? ... Department of Employment and Social Development Act (S.C. 2005, c. 34) Appeal to Tribunal — General Division Dismissal 53 (1) The General Division must summarily dismiss an appeal if it is satisfied that it has no reasonable chance of success. ...

A.    Early 2007 dividend Payments a)      Share Sales Analysis – February 20, 2007 [8]              After Mr. ... Melman’s holding company returns since some date in 2005. Although having prepared his personal tax return for many years, it was in 2005 that Mr. ... C.     April 2008 – Completion of 2007 Tax Returns a)      March 2008 – “ What do I owe? ...

On July 31, 2020, this Court authorized Bresse syndics to act as the appellant in continuance of suit on behalf of CO2. [6] CO2 is a legal entity incorporated on June 20, 2005, pursuant to the Business Corporations Act (C.Q.R.L., c S-31.1). ... REASONS FOR ORDER: RIVOALEN J.A.   DATED: October 1, 2020   APPEARANCES: Julie Gaudreault-Martel   Appellant in continuance of suit   Anne Poirier Simon Petit   For the respondent   COUNSEL OF RECORD: BCF LLP Montreal, Quebec   Appellant in continuance of suit   Nathalie G. Drouin Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario   FOR THE RESPONDENT HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN     ...

"Diane Campbell" Campbell J.         Citation: 2008 TCC 401 Date: 2008 0912 Dockets: 2007-11(IT)I 2007-15(IT)I   BETWEEN: QUY NGUYEN, BETTY LEUNG.   ... Canada, [2005] F.C.J. No. 1921 (F.C.A.). At paragraph 9 he stated:   …Fair market value has often been referred to as a question of fact. ...   [19]     In Klotz v. Canada, [2004] T.C.J. No. 52 (T.C.C.) aff’d. (2005) F.C.J. ...

In 2005, Section 1106(11) of the Income Tax Regulations was added by SOR/2005-126, s.3 and was made retroactive to 1995. ... The amendment was not material. [17] Tax Court of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c T-2. [18] Constitution Act, 1867, 30 & 31 Victoria, c 3 (UK). [19] Supreme Court Act, RSC 1986, c S-26. [20] Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act, 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11. [21] Respondent’s Notice of Motion; Respondent’s Written Submissions at para 5. [22] Notice of Appeal, part f, at paras 11, 12. [23] Ibid, Part (f), at para 16. [24] Ibid. [25] Ibid, Part (f), at para 17. [26] Ibid, Part (f), at paras 16–17. [27] Respondent’s Notice of Motion; Respondent’s Written Submissions, Overview at paras 2–3. [28] Nevsun Resources Ltd v Araya, 2020 SCC 5 at para 64 [Nevsun]; R v Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd, 2011 SCC 42 at para 17 [Imperial Tobacco]; Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC 69 at para 15 [Odhavji Estate]. [29] Heron v R, 2017 TCC 71 at para 11, aff’d 2017 FCA 229; Husky Oil Operations Limited v The Queen, 2019 TCC 136 at para 16. [30] Nevsun, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118539681 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 28 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500330039003600380031000000 at para 64, citing Imperial Tobacco, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118539681 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 28 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500330039003600380031000000 at para 22; Operation Dismantle v The Queen, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 441 at 455, 18 DLR (4th) 481. [31] Nevsun, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118539681 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 28 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500330039003600380031000000 at para 64; Imperial Tobacco, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118539681 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 28 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500330039003600380031000000 at para 22; Odhavji Estate, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118539681 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 28 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500330039003600380031000000 at para 15; Sentinel Hill Productions (1999) Corporation v R, 2007 TCC 742 at para 4(a) [Sentinel Hill Productions]. [32] Sentinel Hill Productions, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540060 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 31 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003000360030000000 at para 4(c). [33] Imperial Tobacco, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118539681 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 28 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500330039003600380031000000 at para 21. [34] Ibid; Odhavji Estate, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118539681 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 28 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500330039003600380031000000 at para 15. [35] Respondent’s Notice of Motion; Respondent’s Written Submissions at paras 14, 28. [36] Respondent’s Notice of Motion; Respondent’s Written Submissions at para 27. [37] Mikisew Cree First Nation v Canada (Governor General in Council), 2018 SCC 40, at para 37 [Mikisew Cree]; Canada (House of Commons) v Vaid, 2005 SCC 30 at paras 4, 29(7), 47, 52 [Vaid]; New Brunswick Broadcasting Co v Nova Scotia (Speaker of the House of Assembly), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 319 at 383, 100 DLR (4th) 212 [New Brunswick Broadcasting Co]. [38] Mikisew Cree, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540162 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 37 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003100360032000000 at para 37; Vaid, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540162 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 37 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003100360032000000 at para 29(10); New Brunswick Broadcasting Co, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540162 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 37 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003100360032000000 at 385. [39] Mikisew Cree, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540162 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 37 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003100360032000000 at para 37. [40] Ibid, at para 96; Re Manitoba Language Rights, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 721 at 724, 19 DLR (4th) 1 [Manitoba Language Rights]. [41] Mikisew Cree, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540162 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 37 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003100360032000000 at para 123. [42] Edinburgh and Dalkeith Railway Company v John Wauchope, [1842] UKHL J12, 8 ER 279 [Wauchope]. [43] R v Irwin, [1926] Ex CR 127, 1926 CarswellNat 15 [Irwin]. [44] PHLF Family Holdings Ltd v Canada, [1994] GSTC 41, [1994] TCJ No 445 (TCC – Informal Procedure) [PHLF]. [45] Authorson v Canada (Attorney General), 2003 SCC 39 [Authorson]. [46] Heckendorn v Canada, 2005 FC 802 [Heckendorn]. [47] Mikisew, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540162 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 37 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003100360032000000. [48] Wauchope, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540465 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 42 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003400360035000000 at 285. [49] Irwin, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540488 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 43 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003400380038000000 at para 7. [50] PHLF, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540492 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 44 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003400390032000000 at para 10. [51] Ibid, at para 8. [52] Supra, note   NOTEREF_Ref118540589 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 17 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003500380039000000 at s 18.28. [53] Lavrinenko v Canada, 2019 FCA 51 at para 17. [54] Authorson, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540604 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 45 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003600300034000000 at para 62. [55] Canadian Bill of Rights, SC 1960, c 44. [56] R v Big M Drug Mart Ltd, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295 at 342-343, 18 DLR (4th) 321. [57] Heckendorn, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540661 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 46 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003600360031000000 at para 18. [58] Mikisew Cree, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540162 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 37 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003100360032000000 at paras 2, 16. [59] Ibid, at para 123. [60] Supra, note   NOTEREF_Ref118542262 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 19 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340032003200360032000000. [61] Manitoba Language Rights, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540727 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 40 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003700320037000000 at 737. [62] Respondent’s Notice of Motion; Respondent’s Written Submissions at para 35. [63] William H. ... <sencanada.ca/en/content/sen/chamber/441/orderpaper/079op_2022-11-15-e>. [75] Supra, note   NOTEREF_Ref118540851 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 65 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003800350031000000 at r 4-5. [76] Ibid, at r 4-13(2), r 4-14. [77] Ibid, at r 4-13(2), r 4-14. [78] Ibid, at r 5-1, r 5-7(j). [79] Ibid, at r 5-1, r 5-6(1)(f). [80] Ibid, at r 5-1, r 5-5(b). [81] Ibid, at r 4-15. [82] Ibid, at r 5-8(1)(h). [83] Ibid, at r 9-1. [84] The Constitution Act, 1867 is incorporated by reference pursuant to r 3-7(1) of the Rules of the Senate of Canada. [85] Royal Assent Act, SC 2002, c 15. [86] Respondent’s Notice of Motion; Respondent’s Written Submissions at paras 44–45. [87] Manitoba Language Rights, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540727 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 40 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003700320037000000 at 768. [88] Respondent’s Notice of Motion; Respondent’s Written Submissions at paras 46–48. [89] Manitoba Language Rights, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118540727 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 40 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340030003700320037000000 at 763; Ontario (Attorney General) v G, 2020 SCC 38 at paras 225–228. [90] Supra, note   NOTEREF_Ref118541962 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 6 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340031003900360032000000 at ss 169(1), 171(1); Ballantyne v Canada, 2013 FCA 30 at para 5; Lassonde v Canada, 2005 FCA 323 at para 3; Sutcliffe v Canada, 2004 FCA 376 at para 15; Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v Martin, 2003 SCC 54 at para 28; Shawn Davitt v Canada (National Revenue), 2012 FCA 27 at para 8; Canada (Attorney General) v Campbell, 2005 FCA 420 at para 23. [91] R v Demers, 2004 SCC 46 at paras 102–103; Corbiere v Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 203 at 286, 173 DLR (4th) 1; R v Campbell, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 3 at 20, 155 DLR (4th) 1. [92] Canada (Attorney General) v Hennelly, [1999] FCJ No 846, 244 NR 399 [Hennelly]. [93] Ibid, at para 3; Attorney General (Canada) v Larkman, 2012 FCA 204 [Larkman] at para 61. [94] Cobuzzi v The Queen, 2017 TCC 27 at para 34. [95] Larkman, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118542088 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 93 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340032003000380038000000 at paras 61–62. [96] Hennelly, supra note   NOTEREF_Ref118542119 \h   \* MERGEFORMAT 92 08D0C9EA79F9BACE118C8200AA004BA90B02000000080000000E0000005F005200650066003100310038003500340032003100310039000000 at para 4. [97] Stanfield v R, 2005 FCA 107 at paras 1–3; Akanda Innovation Inc v The Queen, 2018 FCA 200 at para 19. [98] Janet Walker & Lorne Mitchell Sossin, Civil Litigation (Toronto, Ontario: Irwin Law, 2010) at 34; Mark M. ...

The facts are not in dispute in this appeal. [7]   BMO arranged for financing of $1.4 billion US for the Harris Group in 2005. ... NSULC could, therefore, pay dividends on these preferred shares, and not on the common shares that had the high ACB. [13]   From 2005 to 2010, the Harris Group paid interest to LLC on the borrowed amounts. ... Canada, 2005 SCC 54 at para. 10, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 601). The role of this Court is to determine the interpretation of this provision that was intended by Parliament. [28]   Subsection 39(2) was added to the Act when the taxation of capital gains was introduced in 1972. ...

Beaubier" Beaubier, D.J.           Citation: 2007TCC614 Date: 20071015 Docket: 2006-3131(EI) 2006-3134(CPP) BETWEEN: NUMA TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Appellant, and   THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE, Respondent.       ... They read:   10.       In response to the appeal, the Minister decided that the Worker was employed under a contract of service with the Appellant for the period June 20, 2005 to March 17, 2006.   11.       ... Beaubier,                                                           Deputy Judge   DATE OF JUDGMENT:                    October 15, 2007   APPEARANCES:   Agent for the Appellant: Bernard Lau Counsel for the Respondent: Myra Yuzak   COUNSEL OF RECORD:          For the Appellant:                             Name:                                                    Firm:          For the Respondent:                    John H. ...

., 2007 TCC 543             Docket: 2006-1668(EI) BETWEEN: SÉBASTIEN ROUSSEAU, Appellant, and   THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE, Respondent. ... Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 11th day of September 2007.       “Louise Lamarre Proulx” Lamarre Proulx J.     ...   [19]     Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed.     Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 11th day of September 2007.       ...

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Campbell J. [1]      The Appellant carries on a mortgage brokerage business under the umbrella of the Mortgage Brokers and Lenders Registration Act (the " Mortgage Brokers Act ") in Nova Scotia. ... The Appellant appealed from a determination that the Worker was engaged in insurable employment under a contract of service within the meaning of paragraph 5(1)(a) of the Employment Insurance Act (the " Act ") and that the employment was pensionable pursuant to paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Canada Pension Plan (the " Plan "). ... However the determination of the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") related only to the Worker's employment with the Appellant and did not include Roderick MacInnis personally. [2]      The Respondent relied upon the following assumptions of fact in making the determinations: (a)         the facts stated and admitted above; (b)         the Appellant was in the mortgage brokerage business; (c)         Roderick MacInnis is the sole shareholder and President of the Appellant; (d)         the Worker was hired by the Appellant as a mortgage consultant; (e)         the Worker's duties included meeting with clients to review their mortgage needs and the options available, collecting the required documents, ordering an appraisal, etc.; (f)          the Worker represented the Appellant when performing her duties; (g)         the Worker was required to perform her duties personally; (h)         the Worker was required to maintain a knowledge of the market; (i)          the Worker was required to participate in two annual trade shows as part of a team which represented the Appellant; (j)          the Worker was required to set up a schedule of weekly events that included the Appellant's duty roster, client appointments, marketing time within the community and personal appointments; (k)         the Appellant's duty roster schedule ran from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.; (l)          the Worker's completed files were subject to audit by the Appellant; (m)        the Worker was required to complete training in accordance with the Appellant's training plan; (n)         the Worker was required to meet with management on a regular basis; (o)         the Worker was required to comply with the Appellant's dress code; (p)         the Appellant resolved customer complaints lodged against the Worker; (q)         the Worker's employment was subject to termination by the Appellant; (r)         the Appellant leased a computer for the Worker's use; the Worker reimbursed the Appellant for the lease costs; (s)         the Worker's remuneration was based on a 60/40 commission split on the first $25,000 in finders fees and a 70/30 split on finders fees in excess of $25,000; and (t)          the Worker was required to participate in the Appellant's health benefits package. [3]      Roderick MacInnis testified that his company, the Appellant, operated a mortgage brokerage centre franchised through CIBC Mortgages Inc. ...

Walby, the years appealed are 2005 to 2011. For Mr. De Las Alas, the year appealed is 2006. ... Walby, participated in the GLGI Program in the 2005 to 2011 taxation years. ... Appendix A                                                               CITATION: 2023 TCC 164 COURT FILE NO.: 2021-1574(IT)G 2021-1544(IT)G STYLE OF CAUSE: JOEL DE LAS ALAS v. ...