Search - consideration

The undersigned has advised Mr Gowling that, taking into consideration his salary, his responsibilities with your Company, and the inconvenience he incurred in moving to Montreal to accept employment with your Company, he is entitled to one year’s notice of termination or one year’s salary in lieu thereof. ... Taking into consideration Mr Gowling’s salary, his responsibilities with your Company and the inconvenience he incurred-in moving to Montreal to accept employment with your Company, he is entitled to one years notice, of termination or one year’s salary In lieu thereof. ... In consideration of the foregoing, I agree and undertake not to do anything that might harm or injure any of the said companies involved, including the principals, nor to do anything that may involve them in any difficulties. ...

Davies of a bank debit card and signed blank cheques on the Account constitute an exchange of consideration. ... No consideration or inadequate consideration flowing from the transferor to the transferee.   4.       ... Livingston provided adequate consideration to Ms. Davies for the deposit of these funds by Ms. ...

(i)         The Minister determined that both the $20,000 and $5,000 payments were remuneration received in consideration for a covenant with reference to what the employee is, or is not, to do before or after the termination of the employment ...     [3]      Subsection 6(3) of the Income Tax Act ("the Act") reads as follows:   6(3)      Payments to employer by employee – An amount received by one person from another (a)        during a period while the payee was an officer of, or in the employment of, the payer, or (b)        on account, in lieu of payment or in satisfaction of an obligation arising out of an agreement made by the payer with the payee immediately prior to, during or immediately after a period that the payee was an officer of, or in the employment of, the payer, shall be deemed, for the purposes of section 5, to be remuneration for the payee's services rendered as an officer or during the period of employment, unless it is established that, irrespective of when the agreement, if any, under which the amount was received was made or the form or legal effect thereof, it cannot reasonably be regarded as having been received (c)        as consideration or partial consideration for accepting the office or entering into the contract of employment, (d)        as remuneration or partial remuneration for services as an officer or under the contract of employment, or (e)        in consideration or partial consideration for a covenant with reference to what the officer or employee is, or is not, to do before or after the termination of the employment ... Is it in consideration, or partial consideration, for a covenant with reference to what the employee is, or is not, to do before or after the termination of the employment within the meaning of subsection 6(3) of the Act, or is it a capital payment in exchange for the sale of clientele?   ...

The only issue is whether valuable consideration was given when the property was transferred. [6] Stéphane Chiasson, Lorraine (Noël) Chiasson, Léonide Chiasson and the appellant were called to testify by counsel for the appellant. ... According to him, the lot was sold to the appellant in consideration of the money his mother had lent to Alstep to pay Alstep’s bills. ... I am of the opinion that the evidence failed to establish the source of the cash deposited in Alstep’s bank account. [25] Because the land was appraised as being worth at least the sale price of $25,000 and since there is no evidence of payment of any consideration other than an amount of $12,500, there remains an amount of $12,500 that was transferred to the appellant without valuable consideration. ...

In any event, the submissions of the applicant in this case do not change my view that the Minister had given consideration to relevant matters, that is, the information presented by the applicant upon his initial request to the Minister for waiver of the outstanding interest. ... Minister of National Revenue, supra, where he says: Absent bad faith on the part of the Minister, a breach of the principles of natural justice or consideration of extraneous or irrelevant factors, there is nothing to warrant the Court"s interference with the exercise of his discretion. [13]      The same considerations apply in this case. ... There is nothing on the record to show that there was consideration of extraneous or irrelevant factors in this case. [14]      For the foregoing reasons, the application is dismissed.                          ...

The central issue is whether an amount received by the Appellant in November 1986 from a partnership formed by the Appellant and its copartner in October 1986 was properly assessed by the Minister on the basis that it was consideration for transferring certain technology to the partnership in excess of the nominal amount elected by the parties pursuant to subsection 97(2) of the Income Tax Act R.S.C. 1952, c. 148, as amended [1], and, accordingly, that one-half of the excess was required to be included in income as an eligible capital amount by virtue of paragraph 85(1)(b) and subsection 14(1) of that statute. [2] The fundamental position of the Appellant both here and below was that the amount received- $1,500,000 (U.S.)- cannot be viewed as consideration in excess of the amount elected as consideration for the technology transferred to the partnership. ... Appeal dismissed. 1 Subsection 97(2) reads: 97(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, other than subsection 85(5.1), where at any time after November 12, 1981 a taxpayer has disposed of any capital property, a Canadian resource property, a foreign resource property, an eligible capital property or an inventory to a partnership that immediately after that time was a Canadian partnership of which the taxpayer was a member, if the taxpayer and all the other members of the partnership have jointly so elected in prescribed form and within the time referred to in subsection 96(4), the following rules apply: (a) the provisions of paragraphs 85(1)(a) to (f) apply to the disposition as if (i) the reference therein to “corporation’s cost” were read as a reference to “partnership’s cost”, (ii) the references therein to “other than any shares of the capital stock of the corporation or a right to receive any such shares” and to ‘other than shares of the capital stock of the corporation or a right to receive any such shares” were read as references to “other than an interest in the partnership”, (iii) the references therein to “shareholder of the corporation” were read as references to “member of the partnership” (iv) the references therein to “the corporation” were read as references to “all the other members of the partnership”, and (v) the references therein to “to the corporation” were read as references to “to the partnership”; (b) in computing, at any time after the disposition, the adjusted cost base to the taxpayer of his interest in the partnership immediately after the disposition (i) there shall be added the amount, if any, by which the taxpayer’s proceeds of disposition of the property exceed the fair market value, at the time of the disposition, of the consideration (other than an interest in the partnership) received by the taxpayer for the property, and (ii) there shall be deducted the amount, if any, by which the fair market value, at the time of the disposition, of the consideration (other than an interest in the partnership) received by the taxpayer for the property so disposed of by him exceeds the fair market value of the property at the time of the disposition; and (c) where the property so disposed of by the taxpayer to the partnership is taxable Canadian property of the taxpayer, the interest in the partnership received by him as consideration therefor shall be deemed to be taxable Canadian property of the taxpayer. 2 Paragraph 85(1)(b) reads: 85(1) Where a taxpayer has after May 6, 1974 disposed of any of his property that was a capital property (other than real property, an interest therein or an option in respect thereof, owned by a non-resident person), a Canadian resource property, a foreign resource property, an eligible capital property or an inventory (other than real property) to a taxable Canadian corporation for consideration that includes shares of the capital stock of the corporation, if the taxpayer and the corporation have jointly so elected in prescribed form and within the time referred to in subsection (6), the following rules apply: (a) the amount that the taxpayer and the corporation have agreed upon in their election in respect of the property shall be deemed to be the taxpayer’s proceeds of disposition of the property and the corporation’s cost of the property; (b) subject to paragraph (c), where the amount that the taxpayer and the corporation have agreed upon in their election in respect of the property is less than the fair market value, at the time of the disposition, of the con sideration therefor (other than any shares of the capital stock of the corpora tion or a right to receive any such shares) received by the taxpayer, the amount so agreed upon shall, irrespective of the amount actually so agreed upon by them, be deemed to be an amount equal to that fair market value; Subsection 14(1) reads: 14.(1) Where, at the end of a taxation year, the aggregate of all amounts each of which is an amount determined under subparagraph (5)(a)(iii) in respect of a business or an amount determined under subparagraph (5)(a)(iv) in respect of the business (the latter amount hereinafter referred to as an “eligible capital amount”) exceeds the aggregate of all amounts determined under subparagraphs (5)(a)(i) and (ii) in respect of the business of the taxpayer, the excess shall be included in computing the taxpayer’s income from that business for that taxation year. 3 If in doing so, a trial judge commits no palpable and overriding error which affected his assessment of the facts, an appellate court is not entitled to intervene: Stein v. ...

Consideration [7] The Respondent takes the position that Ms. Sivekumar did not provide any consideration to Mr. ... Sivekumar takes the position that she provided full consideration for the transfer of the property. ... Sivekumar. [12] Based on all of the foregoing, I find that the transfers were made for no consideration. ...

d)      If there is no contract, is there a taxable supply, and was the payment of the fine consideration for that supply?   ... Section 165 of the ETA imposes GST on a taxable supply at the rate of 5% on the value of the consideration for the supply. ... This latter position strikes me somewhat circuitous, as how can there be consideration if there is no agreement ...

By statute, the corporation is bound to reflect the true consideration received for the issuance of the shares in its capital accounts. ... This is when the true consideration for the issuance of the Common Shares was received by Agnico. ... On conversion of the convertible debentures for common shares, what is the consideration for the shares? ...

I may have a good “bargaining position’’ when bargaining for a sale or other contract, but I do not sell or otherwise use this “bargaining position’’ as consideration. I use the “bargaining position’’ as a means of persuading the other party to give me more than he otherwise would for the property or other consideration that I have to dispose of. ... When it agreed to continue to accept the lower price for the more expensive power in consideration of being provided with the capital additions and improvements, it was, in effect, getting the additions and improvements in consideration of surrendering its right to deliver 25 cycle power and agreeing to provide 60 cycle power at a price lower than would otherwise have been economic. ...