Search - connection

In Rana, my colleague Norris J. had this to say, with which I agree: [66]   Here, however, the member found that hartals and blockades fell within the definition of “terrorist activity” simply because there was a causal connection between them and acts of violence.   ...

In my view, having regard to the officer’s findings discussed above in connection with the other two proposed grounds for judicial review, the applicant has not established that he is likely to succeed in demonstrating that it was unreasonable for the officer to conclude that there was no threat to his life or personal safety or any other special considerations that warranted deferral of removal pending the H&C decision. [51]   It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the merits of the applicant’s H&C application at this stage, even if the application had been included in the materials before me.   ...

(a) inform the offender of the referral and review, and [EN BLANC/BLANK] (b) review the case, [EN BLANC/BLANK] and the Board shall cause all such inquiries to be conducted in connection with the review as it considers necessary. ...

He argues that this, in connection with the seven letters of support, supports his establishment in Canada. [17]   At the hearing, the Applicant’s counsel agreed with the Court that the letter from Northplex did not offer the Applicant a job and the letter only stated when he had worked for them. ...

., [1985] 2 S.C.R. 536, 64 N.R. 161 (S.C.C.) were met because the respondent was part of a protected group (those suffering from disability), he was subject to adverse treatment (he was not immediately reinstated when he was fit to return to work) and there was a connection between the failure to return him to work and a protected ground (his disability made it necessary to search for an alternate position). [15]   The FPSLREB then moved to examine the adequacy of the accommodation offered by CSC and accepted that the hurdles CSC faced in returning the respondent to work – namely, his initial failure to qualify for a bilingual position, the presence of his ex-spouse at Cowansville and the presence of the inmate who had assaulted the respondent at Donnacona – were all legitimate and reasonable concerns. ...

Bantrel also paid the $40,000-odd for RM’s licensure for use of specialized software on the Bantrel computer he was given to use. [18]   On the basis of the foregoing I conclude that the ownership of tools factor favours RM being considered an employee of Bantrel, with income paid through Bantrel’s agent DGS. [19]   The next factor for consideration is whether or not RM hires his own helpers in connection with his Bantrel work. ...

A-8) Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) advised AS Inc. that CRA had information that AS Inc. had received incentives from generic pharmaceutical manufacturers and that as they were received in connection with a business undertaking, these receipts were reportable as business income, regardless of payment format. ...

[emphasis added] [31]   In connection with determinations under IRPA ss 96-98, the SIO must be sensitive to the Maldonado Principle that a refugee claimant’s testimony is presumed true and credible absent any reason to discount or disbelieve it: Maldonado, above at para 5. ...

In that decision, the Federal Court held that “[w]hen the group is generic and has no connection to the ITA, and information can be requested outside of the scope of the ITA (such as identifying the business clients of a public utility) there is no longer any limit on the fishing expedition” (at para. 78). ...

They do not agree on whether it was a taxable or an exempt supply. [32]   Indeed, the issue before the Court is whether CanLII is entitled, pursuant to subsection 169(1) of the ETA, to claim ITCs in respect of the GST it paid to the third-party service providers. [33]   Subsection 169(1) reads as follows: Input Tax Credits General rule for credits 169 (1) Subject to this Part, where a person acquires or imports property or a service or brings it into a participating province and, during a reporting period of the person during which the person is a registrant, tax in respect of the supply, importation or bringing in becomes payable by the person or is paid by the person without having become payable, the amount determined by the following formula is an input tax credit of the person in respect of the property or service for the period: A × B where A is the tax in respect of the supply, importation or bringing in, as the case may be, that becomes payable by the person during the reporting period or that is paid by the person during the period without having become payable; and B is (a) where the tax is deemed under subsection 202(4) to have been paid in respect of the property on the last day of a taxation year of the person, the extent (expressed as a percentage of the total use of the property in the course of commercial activities and businesses of the person during that taxation year) to which the person used the property in the course of commercial activities of the person during that taxation year, (b) where the property or service is acquired, imported or brought into the province, as the case may be, by the person for use in improving capital property of the person, the extent (expressed as a percentage) to which the person was using the capital property in the course of commercial activities of the person immediately after the capital property or a portion thereof was last acquired or imported by the person, and (c) in any other case, the extent (expressed as a percentage) to which the person acquired or imported the property or service or brought it into the participating province, as the case may be, for consumption, use or supply in the course of commercial activities of the person. [34]   Therefore, CanLII will be entitled to ITCs if it acquired property or a service for consumption, use or supply in the course of its commercial activities. [35]   Commercial activity is defined in subsection 123(1) as follows: commercial activity  of a person means (a)  a business carried on by the person (other than a business carried on without a reasonable expectation of profit by an individual, a personal trust or a partnership, all of the members of which are individuals), except to the extent to which the business involves the making of exempt supplies by the person, (b)  an adventure or concern of the person in the nature of trade (other than an adventure or concern engaged in without a reasonable expectation of profit by an individual, a personal trust or a partnership, all of the members of which are individuals), except to the extent to which the adventure or concern involves the making of exempt supplies by the person, and (c)  the making of a supply (other than an exempt supply) by the person of real property of the person, including anything done by the person in the course of or in connection with the making of the supply. [36]   In the present case, the respondent argues that by virtue of section 10 of Part VI of Schedule V of the ETA (which section is reproduced above in paragraph 3 of my Reasons) CanLII’s business involved the making of exempt supplies. [37]   The respondent is of the view that all or substantially all the services supplied by CanLII were supplies made for no consideration. [38]   In the respondent’s oral argument, counsel stated that the Federation made discretionary payments that did not fall within the definition of “consideration”, as they were not made pursuant to a legal obligation. ...