Search - consideration

He further found that “there has been an evolution in the doctrine of consideration in the context of contract modifications,” so that now “when parties to a contract agree to vary its terms, the variation should be enforceable without fresh consideration, absent duress, unconscionability, or other public policy concerns.” ...

Newey LJ essentially found that Adecco was not paying the temps as agent for the clients, so that the full consideration received by it from the clients was subject to VAT rather than just the “commission” earned by it. ... Summary of Adecco UK Ltd & Ors v Revenue & Customs [2018] EWCA Civ 1794 under s. 123(1) – consideration. ...

There was a three-party exchange under which the Maxar Canada shareholders transferred their shares to a newly-formed B.C. unlimited liability company subsidiary of Maxar Canada (“AcquisitionCo”); a newly-formed Delaware subsidiary of Maxar Canada (“Maxar U.S.”) issued shares to the former Maxar Canada shareholders in consideration for the transfer to it of Maxar Canada in 1; and, AcquisitionCo issued common shares to Maxar U.S. in consideration for the issuance by Maxar U.S. in 2. ...

Supreme Court rectifies a sale agreement to turn it into a 2-step sale that no longer generated a s. 84.1 dividend Email this Content The executed documents indicated that an individual (Thomas) sold his shares of a corporation to the Newco of his brother (Michael) in consideration for a promissory note of the Newco. ... Supreme Court for a rectification order redoing the written agreement to provide that Thomas sold his shares to Michael directly for a promissory note, and that there was an immediate on-sale by Michael of those shares to his Newco in consideration for it assuming the promissory note. ...

29 April 2019- 11:12pm A pipeline where there are non-resident beneficiaries might use high-PUC shares, not a note Email this Content A post-mortem pipeline is normally effected by the estate transferring its shares of Opco (whose adjusted cost base, but not their paid-up capital, was stepped-up on death) to a new a Holdco in consideration for a Holdco note (which then is gradually paid off following a subsequent amalgamation of Opco and Holdco). ... Ss. 212.1(6)(b) and 212.1(1.1)(a) would deem Holdco to pay a pro rata (1/2) dividend to X, i.e., ½ of the excess of the note consideration over the Opco PUC. ...

In finding that the 60% retained by the Recipient was not consideration for a taxable supply made by it, CRA stated The terms of the contract clearly established that during the term of the contract, all patients treated by the [Mr. ... Thus, the contract terms do not permit a conclusion that the portion of the net revenues retained by [PC] represented consideration for a supply. ...

Canco provided services for no consideration to LLC1. The Directorate concluded that Canco thereby was rendered a resident contributor to NRTrust (so that NRTrust was deemed to be a s. 94-resident trust) because s. 94(2)(f) deemed there to be a transfer of property to that trust, and it would be reasonable to view there as having been a resulting increase in the fair market value of the LLC1 shares. In the Directorate’s view, this result obtained even if s. 247(2) also applied to deem Canco to have received FMV consideration for its services. ...

CRA indicated that it now “has no administrative concession in place that limits the application of subsection 155(1),” and noted that after 1991, s. 155(2) was enacted to provides a detailed code for exceptions to the application of s. 155(1), so that: For example, if a charity were to make a non-arm’s length supply of real property for no consideration that was exempt by way of section 5 of Part V.I of Schedule V to the ETA, subsection 155(1) would not apply to deem the supply to be made for consideration equal to the fair market value of the property. ...

The second component was styled as a royalty agreement and contemplated that in consideration for a stipulated amount advanced to the company (which was labeled as an “interest free loan”), the company was to start paying a percentage of its product sales to the investor after a stipulated level of payments had been made under the loan agreement. ... Accordingly, there was a taxable supply by the company to the investors, and the “principal amount” advanced by them under their “loan” to the company was the up-front consideration charged to them for this taxable supply. ...

6 January 2020- 11:52pm Healius – Federal Court of Australia finds that lump sum payments made to lock-up doctors as customers for a 5-year period were currently deductible Email this Content A subsidiary (“Idameneo”) of an Australian public company that provided medical centre facilities and services to doctors in consideration for 50% of the fees generated by them. In order to induce a doctor to join one of the medical centres operated by it, it would typically pay a lump sum in the range of $300,000 to $500,000 to the doctor in consideration for the doctor’s promise to conduct his or her practice from the medical centre for a specified period of around five years, along with an exclusivity covenant. ...