Search - 2005年 抽纸品牌 质量排名

National Foundation for Christian Leadership, 2004 FC 1753, aff’d 2005 FCA 246 at paragraphs 15-16. ...   [29]            Of course, more extreme facts – not present here – can be supposed. ... "David Stratas" J.A.       “I agree      Johanne Trudel J.A.”   ...

Canada, 2005 SCC 54, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 601: [11][…]There is no doubt today that all statutes, including the Income Tax Act, must be interpreted in a textual, contextual and purposive way. ... Clark, 2005 SCC 2, [2005] S.C.J. No. 4 at para. 51, “Parliament could not have intended that identical words should have different meanings in two consecutive and related provisions of the very same enactment.” [35]            The first usage of this term is in paragraph 118.2(2)(a) of the Act. ... TRUDY TALLON     PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario   DATE OF HEARING: july 2, 2015   REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: ryer j.a.   ...

Porcherie des Cèdres Inc., 2005 FCA 59 at paragraph 13; Canada (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) v. ... Near" J.A.     “I agree      K. Sharlow J.A.”   “I agree      Robert M. ... Pentney Deputy Attorney General of Canada   For The Respondent       ...

Canada, 2005 SCC 54, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 601 at para. 11). Additional conditions cannot be read into the legislation. ... National Foundation for Christian Leadership, 2004 FC 1753, aff'd 2005 FCA 246 at paras. 15-16; see also Canada (National Revenue) v. ... MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE     PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario   DATE OF HEARING: March 2, 2020   REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: RENNIE J.A.   ...

For the 2004, 2005 and 2006 taxation years, Mr. Scheuer paid, respectively, $10,000, $60,000 and $10,000 to GLGI (paragraph 20 amended statement of claim). ... LOTHAR SCHEUER, ET AL.     PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario   DATE OF HEARING: November 17, 2015   REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: DAWSON J.A.   ... WEBB J.A.   DATED: JANUARY 13, 2016   APPEARANCES: Nancy Arnold Sonia Singh   For The Appellants   E.F. ...

Between 2005 and 2007, this structure allowed the Satoma Trust to receive and retain a total of $6 250 100 in taxable dividends on which no tax was paid. ... Canada, 2005 SCC 54, [2005] 2 S.C.R. 601 [Trustco] at paras. 18, 21, 36). [40]   The appellant concedes that if there was a tax benefit, the plan put in place at the instigation of Louis Pilon gives rise to at least one avoidance transaction which suffices to qualify the series the same way (Reasons, para. 76; Copthorne at paras. 40-41). ... Drouin Deputy Attorney General of Canada   For The Respondent     ...

Prince Edward Island College of Optometrists, 2005 SCC 77, [2005] 3 S.C.R. 645, at para. 30). [248] There are exceptions to this classic process. ... Canada (Attorney General), 2005 SCC 25, [2005] 1 S.C.R. 401, at paras. 55-56 and 69-70; Salomon v. ... In paragraph 8 of her reasons, the Federal Court Judge identifies eight categories of information: ● Concentration Information ● Benazepril Acceptance Criteria ● Solubility of Benazepril Information ● Identity of Suppliers and Contractual Agreements ● Packaging and Storage Information ● Stability Information ● Fortekor Acceptance Criteria ● Yeast Powder Information [51] An additional four categories were added in paragraph 11 of her reasons: ● Fortekor Manufacturing Information ● Fortekor Palatability Information ● |||||||| Benazepril Manufacturing Information ● |||||||||| Benazepril Manufacturing Information [52] One of the listed categories is “Identity of Suppliers and Contractual Agreements”, which appears to be two separate categories – the names of the suppliers and the contents of the particular agreements with suppliers. [53] The information that Elanco was seeking to exempt from disclosure under paragraph 20(1)(a) of the Act is set out in paragraph 23 of the reasons and corresponds to the categories of information listed in paragraph 8 of the reasons, other than “Identity of Suppliers and Contractual Agreements”, and to the four additional categories added in paragraph 11 of the reasons. [54] In paragraph 45 of her reasons, the list of categories of information considered in relation to paragraph 20(1)(b) of the Act includes “Supplier Information”. ...

WEBB J.A.         BETWEEN: BAKORP MANAGEMENT LTD.   Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN   Respondent   Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on February 26, 2014. ... Canada Trustco Mortgage Company, 2005 SCC 54, has given us this guidance: 10     It has been long established as a matter of statutory interpretation that “the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament”: see 65302 British Columbia Ltd. v. ...   [49]            As a result I would dismiss this appeal, with costs.     ...

LASKIN J.A.   BETWEEN:     TREVOR PARSONS     Applicant     and     ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA     Respondent   Heard at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on October 29, 2019. ... LASKIN J.A.   BETWEEN:     TREVOR PARSONS     Applicant     and     ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA     Respondent   REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on October 29, 2019). ... The Appeal Division concluded that there was no basis for intervention with the General Division’s decision under subsection 58(1) of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act, S.C. 2005, c. 34 (the Act) and dismissed the appeal. [3]   Despite the clear and candid submissions of the applicant, we are of the view that the Appeal Division did not commit any error that would warrant our intervention. [4]   Therefore, this application for judicial review is dismissed without costs. ...

Department of Forest Resources, 2005 NLTD 87, 247 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 273) and on appeal (Humby Enterprises Ltd v. ... The proceedings were adjourned. [11]            On August 29, 2005, Humby signed a Release and Discharge on behalf of himself, HEL, Central Springs and A&E in exchange for the return of chattels located on the Benton property. [12]            Also in August 2005, Central Springs and A&E filed Notices of Objection with the Minister of National Revenue (the Minister) in respect of the source deduction assessments for 2001, 2002 and 2003. ... They submit that pursuant to the September 26, 2006 order of Justice Bowie in Central Springs #1, the appellants’ time to file a Notice of Objection did not expire until September 2005, yet the CRA initiated enforcement action in January 2005. [19]            The appellants argue that the respondents’ actions were also excessive. ...