Search - consideration

It was again evident that one of his considerations was his desire to minimize the risk of a cost award against the Appellant if his request was turned down. ...

Wetelainen was not indebted to the appellant; f)         the appellant provided no consideration for the transfer of the Cadillac Escalade; g)         the appellant lives at 402 Grand Point Road, Thunder Bay ON; h)         on the Transfer Date, BLIG issued a cheque to Mr. ...

  [25]         Upon consideration of the evidence as a whole, I have concluded that the assessed amounts were unreported income and not loans ...

So far as he is aware, there would be no prejudice to the Respondent if the Court granted an extension of time to file this Motion”. [7]              It is my view that the reason given for the delay is an irrelevant consideration and an insufficient reason to merit an extension of time: Maytag Corp. v. ...

[4]              In Quebec, this issue must be resolved by taking into consideration the Civil Code of Quebec, L.R.Q., c. ...

Apotex Inc. (1983), 76 C.P.R. (2d) 265. (...) (...) if we were dealing with an examination for discovery, where the test of relevancy involves a consideration of what might reasonably be supposed to contain information likely to assist the party in advancing his own case and in damaging the case of his adversary. ...

There is no suggestion of bad faith or other reason that would render the exercise of discretion in this case unlawful. [18]      Having regard to these considerations there is no basis for the Court to interfere with the exercise of discretion by the head of the government institution. [19]      As noted by Strayer J. in Kelly v. ...

The task at hand is to determine, on a balance of probabilities, based on the evidence before me, whether the applicants have been refused access to personal information. [9]                 An important consideration in this review are the findings made on November 15, 2001, by the Privacy Commissioner (the "Commissioner") after investigating the applicants' complaint of July 2000 filed against the Agency alleging the Agency failed to comply with their request for personal information. [10]            Specifically, the applicants had alleged to the Commissioner the Agency's Access to Information and Privacy Division ("ATIP") omitted to retrieve and process all of the records relevant to their request for information, that the Agency refused to disclose information because it was not accessible by virtue of section 12(1) of the Act, the document T20ST Reconciliation was mutilated and other records were removed from their files prior to being processed under the Privacy Act. [11]            The Commissioner found, in many instances, the Agency had initially denied access to personal information to which they were entitled under the Act. ...

Thus, the Respondent argues that the Applicant has failed to point out to any reason which would warrant this Court's intervention. [11]            It is trite law that where the Minister's discretion has been exercised in good faith and in accordance with the principles of natural justice and where reliance has not been placed upon considerations irrelevant or extraneous to the statutory purpose of that discretion, this Court should not interfere with the exercise of that discretion even if the Court would have exercised that discretion in a different manner had it been charged with that responsibility. ...

The court may intervene and set aside the discretionary decision under review only if that decision was made in bad faith, if its author clearly ignored some relevant facts or took into consideration irrelevant facts or if the decision is contrary to law. ...