Search - consideration

Evans summarized for the Barrie TSO Audit Fairness Committee the relevant considerations in the “Recommendation Report – Waiver or Cancellation of Penalty or Interest Under the Fairness Provisions”.  ... Peddle treated him with every consideration as did counsel for the Respondent.    ...

To that end, the Minister is to submit a draft order for the Court’s consideration.   ... The Minister will submit a draft order for the Court’s consideration within ten (10) days of the date of this order.         ...

Thus, these were the only facts that were properly submitted to the decision-maker for its consideration. ...     [49]            Regarding the CRA’s consideration of the previous lack of compliance with tax obligations, the only explanation provided by the applicant to the effect that CRA should not have considered these late-filings was because the taxpayer in the present case is the Estate, not Mr. ...

The focus should be on the treatment of the individual in the process and not on the evaluation of other candidates/employees.   4.2 The term arbitrary is defined as follows: “ In an unreasonable manner, done capriciously; not done or acting according to reason or judgment; not based on rationale or established policy; not the result of a reasoning applied to relevant considerations; discriminatory, i.e., as listed as the prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act. ”   4.3 For each of the three recourse mechanisms, the review must be limited to circumstances that are directly related to the stage in question of the assessment, internal selection process or internal staffing action. ... “Arbitrary” is defined as follows: “In an unreasonable manner, done capriciously; not done or acting according to reason or judgment; not based on rationale or established policy; not the result of a reasoning applied to relevant considerations. . .”. ...

His request cited several matters for the Minister’s consideration, including Wayne Dobson’s medical condition before his death, the circumstances that led to Wayne Dobson’s failure to file returns after 1996, and compassionate matters. ... In such a case, consideration may be given to waiving interest in all or in part for the period from when payments commence until the amounts owing are paid provided the agreed payments are made on time.   5. ...

It was submitted that the Court may set aside the decision under review if it was made in bad faith, if the Minister ignored relevant facts, took irrelevant facts into consideration, or if the decision was contrary to law (see Barron v. ... In such a case, consideration may be given to waiving interest in all or in part for the period from when payments commence until the amounts owing are paid provided the agreed payments are made on time.   10. ...

      [12]            For review of an application, section 113 of the Act provides that it is disposed of as follows:   (a) an applicant whose claim to refugee protection has been rejected may present only new evidence that arose after the rejection or was not reasonably available, or that the applicant could not reasonably have been expected in the circumstances to have presented, at the time of the rejection; (b) a hearing may be held if the Minister, on the basis of prescribed factors, is of the opinion that a hearing is required; (c) in the case of an applicant not described in subsection 112(3), consideration shall be on the basis of sections 96 to 98; (d) in the case of an applicant described in subsection 112(3), consideration shall be on the basis of the factors set out in section 97 and (i) in the case of an applicant for protection who is inadmissible on grounds of serious criminality, whether they are a danger to the public in Canada, or (ii) in the case of any other applicant, whether the application should be refused because of the nature and severity of acts committed by the applicant or because of the danger that the applicant constitutes to the security of Canada. a) le demandeur d’asile débouté ne peut présenter que des éléments de preuve survenus depuis le rejet ou qui n’étaient alors pas normalement accessibles ou, s’ils l’étaient, qu’il n’était pas raisonnable, dans les circonstances, de s’attendre à ce qu’il les ait présentés au moment du rejet; b) une audience peut être tenue si le ministre l’estime requis compte tenu des facteurs réglementaires; c) s’agissant du demandeur non visé au paragraphe 112(3), sur la base des articles 96 à 98; d) s’agissant du demandeur visé au paragraphe 112(3), sur la base des éléments mentionnés à l’article 97 et, d’autre part: (i) soit du fait que le demandeur interdit de territoire pour grande criminalité constitue un danger pour le public au Canada, (ii) soit, dans le cas de tout autre demandeur, du fait que la demande devrait être rejetée en raison de la nature et de la gravité de ses actes passés ou du danger qu’il constitue pour la sécurité du Canada.       ...

Such  10               information would have to be independent  11               to receive consideration given his  12               history.  ... McLean was forced to move his residence is not a  02      consideration which would warrant relief, and indeed  03      today he did not argue differently.  04                            It was also his obligation to  05      make arrangements for the collection of mail, and if  06      he chose not to do so, he can hardly use that as an  07      excuse for not filing his tax returns.  ...

Consideration was given to the request for relief and the matter was analyzed by periods, depending on the events which took place over time ...   [40]            In spite of the able submissions of applicant’s counsel, the Court is not convinced that the decision under consideration falls outside of the realm of acceptable outcomes ...

She also took into consideration the recommendations of the applicant’s psychologist. ... [47]   The applicant emphasized that, having allowed the introduction of a number of documents on the second day of the hearing, even when on the basis of the rules of procedure it was not mandatory, the Member had created a legitimate expectation that these documents would be taken into consideration in the analysis of her case. ...