Search - consideration

The conclusion that there is adequate state protection in Jamaica was reasonably open to the PRRA officer based on consideration of the Jamaica Constabulary letter and other country condition documents. ... This can be seen from the PRRA officer’s consideration of:- the operational difficulties faced by the Jamaica Constabulary as expressed in their letter;- the concern that “effective protection” can be difficult where assailants are unknown, even for the most effective and well-resourced police forces;- the Jamaica Constabulary’s active, though unsuccessful, investigations in response to Mr.  ... On review of the decision, I am satisfied that the PRRA officer’s consideration of the Jamaica Constabulary letter was reasonable. (2)   Other Evidence [47]   Mr. ...

Seventeen days does not qualify as very quickly. [6]   Nevertheless, a number of considerations support an exercise of discretion in favour of hearing the motions despite this delay. ... This consideration has led this Court to say that “[t]hose embarking upon an interlocutory foray to this Court…will not often find a welcome mat when they arrive”: Association of Universities at para. 11; see also Gravel v. ... As well, there is nothing that suggests the moving parties have sought to examine the individuals they say have first-hand evidence or have moved for a Rule 41 summons (as discussed in Tsleil-Waututh No. 1 at para. 103). [52]   On the issue of necessity, three considerations should be kept front of mind. [53]   First, necessity must be “given a flexible definition, capable of encompassing diverse situations” in which “the relevant direct evidence is not, for a variety of reasons, available”: R. v. ...

A prima facie case is one that on a balance of probabilities (i.e. more likely than not) establishes, upon consideration of all the evidence, a factual conclusion at variance with one or more pleaded ministerial assumptions of fact. [24]   AS Inc.’s evidence that the quantum of received AmEx incentives was as it has asserted and not as the Minister has assumed is, as indicated above, not derived from either of the “normal” methods, being testimonial and/or documentary evidence from the suppliers, and/or evidence from contemporaneously kept books and records, as AS Inc. kept no such books and records. ... Simply renouncing such a statement on the basis the CRA did not give the Appellants an opportunity for full consideration of it does not make the filed statement go away; all the more so, absent any evidence that should have been available from books and records contemporaneously maintained by AS Inc. corroborating that the statement was a mistake. ... Q as to report-ability of shareholder benefits- is to me significantly indicative that the non-reporting was not a bona fide position taken with due care and consideration by either of Mr.Q and AS Inc. ...

This is known as a “Pre-Removal Risk Assessment” or “PRRA”: IRPA s 112(1). 112 (1) A person in Canada, other than a person referred to in subsection 115(1), may, in accordance with the regulations, apply to the Minister for protection if they are subject to a removal order that is in force or are named in a certificate described in subsection 77(1). 112 (1) La personne se trouvant au Canada et qui n’est pas visée au paragraphe 115(1) peut, conformément aux règlements, demander la protection au ministre si elle est visée par une mesure de renvoi ayant pris effet ou nommée au certificat visé au paragraphe 77(1). [2]   Given that a positive PRRA confers refugee protection, SIOs will assess risk against IRPA ss 96-98: IRPA ss 113(c), 114(1)(a). 113 Consideration of an application for protection shall be as follows: 113 Il est disposé de la demande comme il suit: … … (c) in the case of an applicant not described in subsection 112(3), consideration shall be on the basis of sections 96 to 98; c) s’agissant du demandeur non visé au paragraphe 112(3), sur la base des articles 96 à 98;...... 114 (1) A decision to allow the application for protection has 114 (1) La décision accordant la demande de protection a pour effet de conférer l’asile au demandeur; toutefois, elle a pour effet, s’agissant de celui visé au paragraphe 112(3), de surseoir, pour le pays ou le lieu en cause, à la mesure de renvoi le visant. ... (iv) la menace ou le risque ne résulte pas de l’incapacité du pays de fournir des soins médicaux ou de santé adéquats. (2) A person in Canada who is a member of a class of persons prescribed by the regulations as being in need of protection is also a person in need of protection. (2) A également qualité de personne à protéger la personne qui se trouve au Canada et fait partie d’une catégorie de personnes auxquelles est reconnu par règlement le besoin de protection. [5]   PRRA applications are usually paper-based; a hearing may be held if the SIO, based on factors prescribed in the Regulations, determines a hearing is required: IRPA 113(b), IRPR s 167 113 Consideration of an application for protection shall be as follows: 113 Il est disposé de la demande comme il suit: … … (b) a hearing may be held if the Minister, on the basis of prescribed factors, is of the opinion that a hearing is required; b) une audience peut être tenue si le ministre l’estime requis compte tenu des facteurs réglementaires;   167 For the purpose of determining whether a hearing is required under paragraph 113(b) of the Act, the factors are the following: 167 Pour l’application de l’alinéa 113b) de la Loi, les facteurs ci-après servent à décider si la tenue d’une audience est requise: (a) whether there is evidence that raises a serious issue of the applicant’s credibility and is related to the factors set out in sections 96 and 97 of the Act; a) l’existence d’éléments de preuve relatifs aux éléments mentionnés aux articles 96 et 97 de la Loi qui soulèvent une question importante en ce qui concerne la crédibilité du demandeur; (b) whether the evidence is central to the decision with respect to the application for protection; and b) l’importance de ces éléments de preuve pour la prise de la décision relative à la demande de protection; (c) whether the evidence, if accepted, would justify allowing the application for protection. c) la question de savoir si ces éléments de preuve, à supposer qu’ils soient admis, justifieraient que soit accordée la protection.   ...

Accordingly, I am not inclined to take this item into consideration in making the costs award. ... First, the principle of indemnity is a paramount consideration. Secondly, the courts must approach the matter on the basis that encourages settlement of all actions from the outset. ... However, I note that counsel for the Appellants spent a considerable amount of time preparing to challenge the statute-barred taxation years at the hearing, although such preparation ultimately was not needed, as the Respondent conceded those taxation years a week before the hearing. [46]   I also take into consideration the expense, in the amount of $13,500, incurred by the Appellants in retaining an expert, even though, by reason of the concessions that were made and the issues that were settled before the hearing began, it was not necessary to call the expert to testify. ...

While no doubt unintended this recalculation had the effect of reducing the gross business income in four of the five taxation years under consideration and to some extent the exercise seems to have favoured the appellant. ... He argued that consideration was given to other factors including the allocation of time and resources to the two sources of income, the allocation of capital to those two sources of income and to the fact that in an economic sense the farm business was always subordinate to the pumping business. ... In that case the Court took into consideration the future capacity of the farming operation to earn income, cash flow, personal involvement, net income and capital investment. ...

The difference cannot be stated in precise and definite terms, but each case must be determined after all of the relevant factors are taken into consideration, but the foregoing indicates in a general way the essential difference. ... In successive years his residence there was in the regular routine of his life acting entirely upon his own choice, and when one takes into consideration these facts, particularly the purpose and object of his establishing that residence, the conclusion appear to be unavoidable that within the meaning of this statute he is one who is ordinarily resident at East Riverside, New Brunswick, and is therefore liable for income tax under section 9(a). ... Notwithstanding these considerations, I think that the conclusion that is more consonant with the tests of ordinary residency enunciated in other cases is that by 1987 Canada had become again his place of ordinary residence. ...

In coming to the conclusion that the expenditures are on income account, the Court took into consideration the principles developed in the case law discussed below. ... One consideration may point so clearly that it dominates other and vaguer indications in the contrary direction. ... Although the categories of capital and income expenditure are distinct and easily ascertainable in obvious cases that lie far from the boundary, the line of distinction is often hard to draw in border line cases; and conflicting considerations may produce a situation where the answer turns on questions of emphasis and degree. ...

The consideration received by the plaintiff for the sale was 1,000 Class B Common, non-voting, participating shares of TWL with a par value of $1 per share. ... Analysis Subparagraph 20(1)(c)(i) was the subject of consideration by the Supreme Court of Canada in The Queen v. ... I have weighed the plaintiff's submissions, and while I am in agreement that I must give consideration to the economic and commercial reality of the transfer of Realwest shares to TWL, in my mind, the plaintiff's characterization of the facts is fallacious. ...

À consideration of statements in Articles of Incorporation regarding the objects of the corporation or restrictions on the businesses it may carry on is not helpful. ... If an individual who is an appellant has a history of trading in real estate or if the appellant is a corporation that is controlled by such a person, this is a relevant consideration which points away from the purchase in issue being made with the primary intention of securing an income-producing asset: Vaughan Construction Co. v. ... Tarantino for his consideration. The deal when consummated was clearly based on future potential as a property capable of producing rental revenue and Mr. ...