Search - connection

The majority described the distinction at paragraph 18: A distinction must be made between what I would describe as direct discrimination and the concept already referred to as adverse effect discrimination in connection with employment. Direct discrimination occurs in this connection where an employer adopts a practice or rule which on its face discriminates on a prohibited ground. ...

In Reference re Manitoba Language Rights, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 212, the Supreme Court stated that the criteria for determining whether an instrument is legislative in nature are as follows: [48]      To make this determination, the form, content and effect of the instrument in question must be considered: (a) With respect to form, sufficient connection between the legislature and the instrument is indicative of a legislative nature. This connection is established where the instrument is, pursuant to legislation, enacted by the Government or made subject to the approval of the Government. ...

At this time, CRA had information available to it regarding GLGI’s sales (para 152); •            CRA accepted the Plaintiffs’ donations to GLGI, creating further reliance by the Plaintiffs on CRA that the scheme was approved by CRA (para 154); •            CRA waited until 3 years later to reassess the tax payer, when CRA knew or ought to have known that the donation would not be accepted (para 156); and •            CRA has continued to allow GLGI to market its program to Canadian taxpayers, knowing that none of the tax credits issued will be honoured by CRA (para 155). [27]            The duty of care jurisprudence has suggested that the following features are common among cases where regulators have been held to owe a duty: (i) the facts demonstrate a relationship and connection between the regulator and individual that is distinct from and more direct than the relationship between the regulator and that part of the public affected by the regulator’s work; and (ii) the public statutory duties are consistent with the existence of a private law duty of care owed to an individual plaintiff: Taylor at paras 80, 88, 104. [28]            The facts as alleged above provide some basis for distinguishing the relationship between the CRA and these Plaintiffs from the relationship that exists between the CRA and all those affected by its actions. ... The close causal connection between the alleged misconduct and the harm is another indicator of proximity, according to Odhavji. ...

The evidence reveals that between 1988 and 2013, the applicant did in fact work as: (i) an anti-narcotics police inspector (1988–1992); (ii) chief inspector of the intervention and rescue brigade in Tunis (1992–1997); (iii) divisional inspector in the counter-terrorism information brigade (1997–2003); (iv) again in connection with anti-terrorism, head of the foreign office in the district of Bizerte (2003–2008); (v) senior officer and head of the Bizerte district tourist police brigade (2008–2010); and (vi) police commissioner and supervisor of the health department of the internal security forces of the district of Bizerte (2010–2013). [4]                On January 13, 2014, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness of Canada (the “Minister”) intervened in the refugee claim file. He found that there were serious reasons for considering that during his police career the applicant may have participated in or acted as an accomplice in crimes against humanity in connection with human rights violations committed against the civilian population by various Tunisian police forces during the reign of former President Ben Ali, who was swept from power in January 2011, thereby excluding him from the definition of refugee or person in need of protection within the meaning of the Act. [5]                On December 23, 2014, the RPD found in favour of the Minister’s intervention, excluded the appellant from the definition of refugee or person in need of protection, and based on the incoherence of his testimony, found that the other family members’ claim for refugee protection lacked credibility. ...

As a result, it did not meet the requirements. [36]   In both decisions, the Team Leader explained that relief for serious illness and mental distress generally requires a connection between the circumstances and the inability to file a return or pay on time.   ... All relevant factors that affect the individual taxpayer’s benefits and obligations in connection with their financial and living requirements may be reviewed to determine the taxpayer’s ability to pay a balance owing. [64]   The Income Tax decision on personal financial hardship reached a reasonable decision that the Applicants did not demonstrate financial hardship.   ...

The provisions of sections 171, 174 and 175 which are relevant to this dispute are as follows: Maximum hours of work Durée maximale du travail 171 (1) An employee may be employed in excess of the standard hours of work but, subject to sections 172, 176 and 177, and to any regulations made pursuant to section 175, the total hours that may be worked by any employee in any week shall not exceed forty-eight hours in a week or such fewer total number of hours as may be prescribed by the regulations as maximum working hours in the industrial establishment in or in connection with the operation of which the employee is employed. 171 (1) L’employé peut être employé au-delà de la durée normale du travail. ... Regulations for the purpose of this Division Règlements 175 (1) The Governor in Council may make regulations 175 (1) Le gouverneur en conseil peut, par règlement: (a) modifying any provision of this Division for the purpose of the application of this Division to classes of employees who are employed in or in connection with the operation of any industrial establishment if, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, the application of those sections without modification a) adapter toute disposition de la présente section au cas de certaines catégories d’employés exécutant un travail lié à l’exploitation de certains établissements s’il estime qu’en leur état actuel, l’application de ces articles : (i) would be or is unduly prejudicial to the interests of the employees in those classes, or (i) soit porte — ou porterait — atteinte aux intérêts des employés de ces catégories, (ii) would be or is seriously detrimental to the operation of the industrial establishment; (ii) soit cause — ou causerait — un grave préjudice au fonctionnement de ces établissements; (b) exempting any class of employees from the application of any provision of this Division if the Governor in Council is satisfied that it cannot reasonably be applied to that class of employees; b) soustraire des catégories d’employés à l’application de toute disposition de la présente section s’il est convaincu qu’elle ne se justifie pas dans leur cas; [8]   In summary, the general rule is that the standard hours of work are eight hours a day and forty hours a week, but the Code allows the Governor in Council to exempt certain categories of employees from the general rule. ...

Article 1 C of the 1951 Convention provides that: “This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if: (1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or (2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or (3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or (4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution; or (5) He can no longer, because the circumstances in connexion with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, continue to refuse to avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; Provided that this paragraph shall not apply to a refugee falling under Section A (1) of this Article who is able to invoke compelling reasons arising out of previous persecution for refusing to avail himself of the protection of the country of nationality; (6) Being a person who has no nationality he is, because the circumstances in connexion with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, able to return to the country of his former habitual residence; Provided that this paragraph shall not apply to a refugee falling under section A (1) of this Article who is able to invoke compelling reasons arising out of previous persecution for refusing to return to the country of his former habitual residence.” 114. ...

The H&C application is not to be treated either as another way of immigrating to Canada: “Nor was s. 25(1) intended to be an alternative immigration scheme”. [13]   In Agraira v Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2013 SCC 36, [2013] 2 S.C.R. 559, the Court noted that “H&C considerations include such matters as children’s rights, needs and best interests; maintaining connections between family members; and averting the hardship a person would suffer on being sent to a place where he or she has no connections (see Baker, at paras. 67 and 72)” (para 41). ...

Sharp and a number of related companies and business associates in connection with a complex tax evasion scheme. ... Apart from a clear decision to pursue a criminal investigation, no one factor is necessarily determinative in and of itself, but courts must assess the totality of the circumstances, and make a determination as to whether the inquiry or question in issue engages the adversarial relationship between the state and the individual. 94 In this connection, the trial judge will look at all factors, including but not limited to such questions as: (a) Did the authorities have reasonable grounds to lay charges? ...

See also 139(1)(ae) of the Income Tax Act which includes as "personal and living expenses” and therefore not deductible for tax purposes, the expenses of properties maintained by the taxpayer for his own use and benefit, and not maintained in connection with a business carried on for profit or with a reasonable expectation of profit. ... In this connection, the Court must nevertheless keep in mind a statement in the Federal Court by Mahoney, J. ...