Search - connection

The Minister saw no causal connection between those circumstances and the 1997 tax liability. ...

Government of Canada, [1982] 2 S.C.R. 2, McIntyre J. of the Supreme Court of Canada said in this connection: [8]... ...

Secondly, pursuant to s. 24 of the Charter, the plaintiffs asked the Court to rule that s. 231.2(1) of the Act is of no force or effect as it authorizes unreasonable seizures within the meaning of s. 8 of the Charter. [2] [6]            This is the background against which the plaintiffs are seeking, by the time their action is heard, a stay of the request for information and documents. [7]            In their brief filed in connection with this motion the defendants made a preliminary objection, that the motion was inadmissible simply because the interlocutory remedy sought can only be obtained in an application for judicial review, not in the course of an action against the Crown. ...

M.N.R. (1967), 67 D.T.C. 5235, the Exchequer Court of Canada gave the following ruling as to the meaning to be given to an allowance as opposed to a reimbursement in connection with a provision of the Income Tax Act, at 5243 and 5244:         ... ...

During the period of his residency in Penetanguishene the Plaintiff was frequently required to travel to Toronto in connection with his activity as broadcaster-commentator for radio station CKEY.                                   3.      ...

Similarly, the Court reads Bernard Certain’s affidavit dated March 2, 2010 as seeking to protect the list of clients and list of questions asked in connection with what the parties call the ECAT meeting. [26] Even though, through those affidavits, Bell is essentially the subject of an indirect request to modify the protection order issued on December 29, 2008 and that it did not or was unable to produce affidavits to counter Eurocopter’s affidavits, I nevertheless ultimately grant, so as to cut short this interlocutory debate, the CEO degree of protection sought by Eurocopter, but only for the documents or information mentioned in the previous paragraph, provided that such documents or information are the subject of one or more of the questions to be answered. [27] In fact, I believe that the affidavits of Pierre Prud’homme Lacroix and Bernard Certain set out unusual circumstances sought in case law for that degree of protection (see Merck & Co. v. ...

But these are not developed in any intelligible fashion that could be recognized as a valid claim and the references to aboriginal treaty rights have no apparent connection to the remainder of the material. ...

The Case Summary was prepared in connection with the CRA’s first reply to the Applicant and the Amended Case Summary relates to the second decision, the one that maintained an exemption only with respect to a part of page 5 of the Memorandum. ...

This sum included amounts for which the Applicant could not provide receipts in connection with conducting business in Kenya, Uganda and South Africa, as well as personal use of a company vehicle. ...

This request for clarification revealed the true scope of paragraph 44 of the statement of defence, and there is just cause to now strike out paragraph 44. [19]            There is no further need to allow Danone to modify or amend this paragraph 44 of its statement of defence for the purpose of allowing a connection between Danone’s statement of defence and its counterclaim, since Danone’s counterclaim can very well be included in its statement of defence without the presence of paragraph 44. ...