Search - connection

.), at pp. 5200-5201: Finally, I should say on this point that the material submitted in support of this application does not, in my opinion, provide a reasonably arguable case for an exercise of judicial discretion increasing the fees for services of solicitors and counsel in connection with this appeal. ... All that has been established here is that the respondent incurred a very large solicitor and client bill in connection with the appeal, which would have been relevant if costs had been awarded on a solicitor and client basis but is not ordinarily relevant to the determination of costs on a party and party basis. ...

.): ● the nature of the property sold; ● the length of the period of ownership; ● the frequency or number of similar transactions; ● work expended on or in connection with the property; ● the circumstances that were responsible for the sale of the property; ● motive. [25] The tests are all based on the facts of the particular case and directly or indirectly lead back to the intention of the taxpayer. … [4] If the Appellants were builders within the meaning of section 123 of the Excise Tax Act, they were required to remit GST/HST when they sold the home. ... (d) Work Expended on or in Connection with the Property [31] After moving into Balliol, the Appellants obtained a new home warranty from the Province of Ontario. ...

The issue in these appeals is to determine whether, in the circumstances of the Appellant's employment, he was entitled to the OETC or the exemption. 2 The relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act are parts of sections 110 and 122.3: 110 (1) For the purpose of computing the taxable income of a taxpayer for a taxation year, there may be deducted such of the following amounts as are applicable: (f)... any amount that is (iii) income from employment with a prescribed international organization,... to the extent that it is included in computing the taxpayer's income for the year; 122.3 (1) Where an individual is resident in Canada in a taxation year and, throughout any period of more than 6 consecutive months that commenced before the end of the year and included any part of the year (in this subsection referred to as the “qualifying period”) (a) was employed by a person who was a specified employer, other than for the performance of services under a prescribed international development assistance program of the Government of Canada, and (b) performed all or substantially all the duties of the individual's employment outside Canada (i) in connection with a contract under which the specified employer carried on business outside Canada with respect to there may be deducted, from the amount that would, but for this section, be the individual's tax payable under this Part for the year, an amount equal to that proportion of the tax otherwise payable under this Part for the year by the individual that... ... Notwithstanding the close connection between James Creagh and his associates on one hand and the UN personnel on the other hand, Lamarre Proulx J. found that Mr. ...

Thus, referring to the partnership contracts,counsel for the respondent argued that although the appellant owned the money in his capital account he could not permanently withdraw it unless he withdrew from the partnership, in which case his capital would be paid to him gradually over a three- to five-year period.In fact, according to the appellant's own testimony, under the policy on discretionary withdrawals adopted by the partnership the money withdrawn by the appellant had to be reimbursed before the end of its financial year. 14 Counsel for the respondent argued that the appellant had to present evidence of a bona fide intent to use the money borrowed to earn income, and that in this connection the Court must look at the ultimate purpose of the transactions. ... The binding effect of an obiter becomes clearly more so when such an unambiguous opinion is stated in a unanimous judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada.In this connection I take the liberty of adopting here the remark made by Associate Chief Judge Christie of this Court in Cutmore.Though he considered in that case that the observations referred to were not an obiter dictum of the Supreme Court, Associate Chief Judge Christie added: Even if it were, this passage from the reasons for judgment delivered by Robertson C.J.O. on behalf of the Ontario Court of Appeal in City of Ottawa v. ...

Cockburn, Foster & Co. in which the Appellant released SunLife from any further claims in connection with the motor vehicle accident. ... The parties hereto agree that any monies recovered as a result of a Judgment, settlement or cost order in favour of the Claimant shall be disbursed as follows and in the following priority: (a) First, the Insurer shall be entitled to recover both its solicitor and client costs as well as its judicial and extrajudicial costs paid to its own solicitors for fees and expenses in connection with the said action or settlement; (b) Secondly, the Insurer shall be entitled to reimbursement of all no-fault benefits paid to the Claimant prior to such Judgment, Order or settlement; (c) Thirdly, in the event that any monies are collected in excess of (a) and (b), the Insurer is entitled to receive a credit of such monies toward any no-fault benefits which may become payable to the Claimant after the date of such Judgment, Order or settlement; (d) Fourthly, in the event that there are any monies collected in excess of that mentioned in (a) and (b), such monies shall be paid over to the Claimant. 19 I note that the opening words of paragraph 3 refer to “...any monies recovered as a result of a Judgment... in favour of the Claimant...”. ...

The Respondent has advised that the Department’s lawyers spent a total of 72.14 hours responding to the Motion. [25] [25] Concerning the volume-of-work factor, the Appellant submits that “The volume of work with respect to the Motion was hardly substantial nor did it warrant an important investment of time by the Respondent.” [26] I do not accept the Appellant’s submission concerning the volume of work, particularly as I was required to spend many hours myself, endeavoring to ascertain the connection that the Appellant was trying to make between several interlocutory orders granted by Justice Favreau in respect of this Appeal and the arguments put forth by the Appellant as to why various provisions of the Second Amended Reply should therefore be struck out. ... To understand the Appellant’s attack on paragraph 5.1 and subparagraph 5.2(b) of the Second Amended Reply, it was necessary for the Respondent (as well as for me) to review several orders granted by Justice Favreau in 2020, and then to analyze the alleged connection between those orders and the Appellant’s arguments for striking out paragraph 5.1 and a portion of subparagraph 5.2(b) of the Second Amended Reply. ...

Further ITC issue [37] The regulations concerning ITCs require evidence of association with the acquisition of taxable supplies by a registrant in connection to the commercial activity. ... This is quite apart from the second point of whether SMP Inc. acquired any of these presently denied additional “supplies” in connection with commercial activity. [39] On that basis, the Court is prepared to allow the additional ITCs for the 2011 and 2012 periods only to the extent outlined in the chart in paragraph 29 above. ...

The Respondent mostly emphasised the Appellant’s failure to produce copies of bank drafts purchased in 2006 that were payable to Mega Church, together with the fact that the CRA had sent him correspondence in 2006 that insisted on proof of payment in connection with their audit of his charitable donations made in 2003, 2004, and 2005 and, therefore, he should have been on notice to obtain or retain copies of any bank drafts purchased to make donations to Mega Church in 2006. ... Even if the Appellant was aware of the matters that the Minister was reviewing in connection with these entities prior to the revocation of their charitable registrations-- and there was no evidence to suggest that the Appellant was so aware-- his knowledge of this information might speak to his motivations for making the donations, but not whether he actually made the payments to those entities in the years claimed. ...

Furthermore, since the horse racing activities had no connection with the other activities of the appellant, it could not be concluded that the appellant’s chief source of income was a combination of farming and another source. ... Finally, although this was not argued by the appellant, I find that the horse racing activities had no connection with the other activities of the company and the resources devoted by the appellant to the farming were not that substantial. ...

In this connection, he contended that the additional value of the Appellant’s equity of redemption is not property in itself. ... In this connection, Counsel for the Respondent advanced the broad proposi- tion that anything of value is property. ...