Search - consideration

("Simplexity") was incorporated as a vehicle to own the enhanced database version of the RJs Law software. [9]            On February17, 1994, the Corporation and Webber assigned their rights in the enhanced database version of RJs Law Database to Simplexity at a nominal value of $100 in consideration for common shares of Simplexity. ... I have found the additional facts relevant and have taken them into consideration in arriving at a decision. [24]          In November 1996, the Business Development Bank loaned the Firearms Division of the Corporation $30,000 to finance the custom shotgun project in part. ... Analysis [28]          I permitted Miller, on behalf of the Corporation, to voice his complaints of the Minister's approach and lack of expertise which of course is not relevant and has not been taken into consideration. ...

The previous version stated: 58(1) A party may apply to the Court, (a) for the determination, before hearing, of a question of law, a question of fact or a question of mixed law and fact raised by a pleading in a proceeding where the determination of the question may dispose of all or part of the proceeding, substantially shorten the hearing or result in a substantial saving of costs, or (b) to strike out a pleading because it discloses no reasonable grounds for appeal or for opposing the appeal, and the Court may grant judgment accordingly. (2) No evidence is admissible on an application, (a) under paragraph (1)(a), except with leave of the Court or on consent of the parties, or (b) under paragraph (1)(b). (3) The respondent may apply to the Court to have an appeal dismissed on the ground that, (a) the Court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of an appeal, (b) a condition precedent to instituting a valid appeal has not been met, or (c) the appellant is without legal capacity to commence or continue the proceeding, and the Court may grant judgment accordingly. [6] [12]         In my view, the changes to the text and structure of Rule 58, when compared to the previous version, are sufficient to warrant a fresh consideration of the rule as it now exists. [13]         Rule 58 continues to describe a two-stage process. ... Alberta (Energy and Utilities Board), 2006 SCC 4, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 140, at para. 51) Although Bastarache J. was referring to an administrative tribunal, the same rule of jurisdiction, by necessary implication, would apply to statutory courts. [8] [22]         Apart from being reflective of the Court’s implied authority to control its own process, the repetition of the permissive aspect of Rule 58 reinforces the point that there may well be other considerations at play that factor into the Court’s decision whether or not to grant an order. ... Rather, the possibility of that answer should be factored into the Court’s consideration of whether or not to exercise its discretion to grant an order under Rule 58. ...

., 94 DTC 6511.The Court in Hughes focused on a regular work schedule and normal working hours as key considerations in determining if an employee is full-time. ... This distinction reflects the broad consideration which Parliament had in mind when it provided for a minimum of five full-time employment throughout the year. ... Otherwise, it seems to me that it could be argued that all of the services provided by the associated corporations could be performed by independent contractors and therefore the exception in paragraph (b) might never apply. [73]          I do not agree, however, that the test excludes consideration of replacing the services of the associated corporations with part-time employees. ...

In paragraph 46 of its memorandum, Tusk Exploration stated that “[a] corporation can only purport to renounce amounts because of the application of s. 66(12.66) if all of the requirements of s. 66(12.66) are met.” [24]   The requirements of subsection 66(12.66) of the ITA are as follows: (12.66) Where (12.66) Pour l’application du paragraphe (12.6) et pour l’application du paragraphe (12.601) et de l’alinéa (12.602) b), la société qui émet une action accréditive à une personne conformément à une convention est réputée avoir engagé des frais d’exploration au Canada ou des frais d’aménagement au Canada le dernier jour de l’année civile précédant une année civile donnée si les conditions ci-après sont réunies: (a) a corporation that issues a flow-through share to a person under an agreement incurs, in a particular calendar year, Canadian exploration expenses or Canadian development expenses, a) la société engage les frais au cours de l’année donnée; (a.1) the agreement was made in the preceding calendar year, a.1) la convention a été conclue au cours de l’année précédente; (b) the expenses b) les frais, selon le cas: (i) are described in paragraph (a), (d), (f) or (g.1) of the definition Canadian exploration expense in subsection 66.1(6) or paragraph (a) or (b) of the definition Canadian development expense in subsection 66.2(5), (i) sont des dépenses visées aux alinéas a), d), f) ou g.1) de la définition de frais d’exploration au Canada au paragraphe 66.1(6) ou aux alinéas a) ou b) de la définition de frais d’aménagement au Canada au paragraphe 66.2(5), (ii) would be described in paragraph (h) of the definition Canadian exploration expense in subsection 66.1(6) if the reference to “paragraphs (a) to (d) and (f) to (g.4)” in that paragraph were read as “paragraphs (a), (d), (f) and (g.1)”, or (ii) seraient des dépenses visées à l’alinéa h) de la définition de frais d’exploration au Canada au paragraphe 66.1(6) si le passage « alinéas a) à d) et f) à g.4) » à cet alinéa était remplacé par « alinéas a), d), f) et g.1) », (iii) would be described in paragraph (f) of the definition Canadian development expense in subsection 66.2(5) if the words “any of paragraphs 66(12.66)(a) to (e)” were read as “paragraph 66(12.66)(a) or (b)”, (iii) seraient des dépenses visées à l’alinéa f) de la définition de frais d’aménagement au Canada au paragraphe 66.2(5) si le passage « à l’un des alinéas a) à e) » était remplacé par « aux alinéas a) ou b) »; (c) before the end of that preceding year the person paid the consideration in money for the share to be issued, c) la personne a payé l’action à émettre en argent avant la fin de l’année précédente; (d) the corporation and the person deal with each other at arm’s length throughout the particular year, and d) la société et la personne n’ont entre elles aucun lien de dépendance tout au long de l’année donnée; (e) in January, February or March of the particular year, the corporation renounces an amount in respect of the expenses to the person in respect of the share in accordance with subsection 66(12.6) or 66(12.601) and the effective date of the renunciation is the last day of that preceding year,   the corporation is, for the purpose of subsection (12.6), or of subsection (12.601) and paragraph (12.602)(b), as the case may be, deemed to have incurred the expenses on the last day of that preceding year. e) en janvier, février ou mars de l’année donnée, la société renonce à un montant au titre de ces frais, en ce qui concerne l’action, en faveur de la personne, conformément aux paragraphes (12.6) ou (12.601) et la renonciation prend effet le dernier jour de l’année précédente. [25]   Paragraph 66(12.66)(d) of the ITA provides that one of the conditions for the application of subsection 66(12.66) of the ITA is that the corporation and the person to whom the corporation will be renouncing CEE deal with each other at arm’s length. ... This definition is as follows: specified future tax consequence for a taxation year means conséquence fiscale future déterminée Quant à une année d’imposition: (a) the consequence of the deduction or exclusion of an amount referred to in paragraph 161(7)(a), a) la conséquence de la déduction ou de l’exclusion d’un montant visé à l’alinéa 161(7) a); (b) the consequence of a reduction under subsection 66(12.73) of a particular amount purported to be renounced by a corporation after the beginning of the year to a person or partnership under subsection 66(12.6) or 66(12.601) because of the application of subsection 66(12.66), determined as if the purported renunciation would, but for subsection 66(12.73), have been effective only where b) la conséquence de la réduction, prévue au paragraphe 66(12.73), d’un montant auquel une société a censément renoncé après le début de l’année en faveur d’une personne ou d’une société de personnes en vertu des paragraphes 66(12.6) ou (12.601) par l’effet du paragraphe 66(12.66), déterminée selon l’hypothèse que cette renonciation, n’eût été le paragraphe 66(12.73), aurait pris effet seulement si, à la fois: (i) the purported renunciation occurred in January, February or March of a calendar year, (i) la renonciation avait été effectuée en janvier, février ou mars d’une année civile, (ii) the effective date of the purported renunciation was the last day of the preceding calendar year, (ii) la renonciation avait pris effet le dernier jour de l’année civile précédente, (iii) the corporation agreed in that preceding calendar year to issue a flow-though share to the person or partnership, (iii) la société avait convenu, au cours de cette année précédente, d’émettre une action accréditive à une personne ou une société de personnes, (iv) the particular amount does not exceed the amount, if any, by which the consideration for which the share is to be issued exceeds the total of all other amounts purported by the corporation to have been renounced under subsection 66(12.6) or 66(12.601) in respect of that consideration, (iv) le montant n’avait pas dépassé l’excédent éventuel de la contrepartie de l’émission de l’action sur le total des autres montants auxquels la société a censément renoncé en vertu des paragraphes 66(12.6) ou (12.601) relativement à cette contrepartie, (v) paragraphs 66(12.66)(c) and 66(12.66)(d) are satisfied with respect to the purported renunciation, and (v) les conditions énoncées aux alinéas 66(12.66) c) et d) sont remplies en ce qui concerne la renonciation, (vi) the form prescribed for the purpose of subsection 66(12.7) in respect of the purported renunciation is filed with the Minister before May of the calendar year, and (vi) le formulaire requis par le paragraphe 66(12.7) relativement à la renonciation est présenté au ministre avant mai de l’année civile; (c) the consequence of an adjustment or a reduction described in subsection 161(6.1); c) la conséquence du rajustement ou de la réduction visés au paragraphe 161(6.1). ...

To assess whether the distinctions are sufficiently significant, one can ask, among other things, whether the policy considerations behind the precedent are still present (see, for example, Childs v Desormeaux, 2006 SCC 18 at paragraphs 17−23, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 643); whether the statutes at issue have similar or different objectives (see, for example, R v Big M Drug Mart Ltd, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295 at pages 342–344); or whether, despite their similar wording, they are part of different legislative contexts (see, for example, Quebec (Attorney General) v Canada (Attorney General), 2015 SCC 22, [2015] 2 S.C.R. 179). ... On this point, it should be noted that, when assessing private law criteria, one must take into consideration the purpose of the statute or rule of law that one considers applying. ... Céré had no employment relationship with the government and could not receive a pension under the PSSA for the period under consideration. [53]   The reasoning adopted by the Pension Centre is a complete perversion of the test for establishing an employment relationship. ...

This requires a consideration of the framework under which the ETA operates. [29]   GST is imposed on all taxable supplies made in Canada (ETA, ss. 165(1)), which includes supplies that are imported into Canada (ETA, divs III and IV). ... DIVISION II SECTION II Goods and Services Tax Taxe sur les produits et services SUBDIVISION A SOUS-SECTION A Imposition of Tax Assujettissement 165 (1) Subject to this Part, every recipient of a taxable supply made in Canada shall pay to Her Majesty in right of Canada tax in respect of the supply calculated at the rate of 5% on the value of the consideration for the supply. […] 165 (1) Sous réserve des autres dispositions de la présente partie, l’acquéreur d’une fourniture taxable effectuée au Canada est tenu de payer à Sa Majesté du chef du Canada une taxe calculée au taux de 5 % sur la valeur de la contrepartie de la fourniture. […] (3) The tax rate in respect of a taxable supply that is a zero-rated supply is 0%. (3) Le taux de la taxe relative à une fourniture détaxée est nul. ... DIVISION IV SECTION IV Tax on Imported Taxable Supplies Taxe sur les fournitures taxables importées 217 The following definitions apply in this Division. 217 Les définitions qui suivent s’appliquent à la présente section. imported taxable supply   means fourniture taxable importée  Sont des fournitures taxables importées: (a) a taxable supply (other than a zero-rated or prescribed supply) of a service made outside Canada to a person who is resident in Canada, … a) la fourniture taxable d’un service, sauf une fourniture détaxée ou visée par règlement, effectuée à l’étranger au profit d’une personne qui réside au Canada, […] 218 Subject to this Part, every recipient of an imported taxable supply shall pay to Her Majesty in right of Canada tax calculated at the rate of 5% on the value of the consideration for the imported taxable supply. 218 Sous réserve des autres dispositions de la présente partie, l’acquéreur d’une fourniture taxable importée est tenu de payer à Sa Majesté du chef du Canada une taxe calculée au taux de 5 % sur la valeur de la contrepartie de la fourniture. ...

Standard of review [53]   The delegate’s subsection 204.1(4) analysis involves two separate components: first, consideration of the test to be applied under the subsection, and, second, application of that test to the facts of Mr. ... Connolly that the first aspect of the delegate’s consideration of the subsection 204.1(4) analysis, involving delineation of the applicable test enshrined in the subsection, raises a question of law and that, to date, this Court has reviewed legal interpretations made by the Minister or a ministerial delegate of provisions in the ITA for correctness, even though under the Dunsmuir v. ... Nor is it reasonable to exclude from consideration all errors flowing from a mistake about the quantum of available contribution room or all errors caused by bad advice received from a third party. ...

For example, when implementing paragraph 46(1)(c.1) of the IRPA in 2012, Parliament could have insisted that the RPD first consider any cessation of refugee status under paragraph 108(1)(e) before any consideration of the remaining paragraphs of the subsection, but chose not to do so. [35]   The jurisprudence of this Court is consistent, establishing that the RPD may proceed on any of the grounds set out in subsection 108(1) of the IRPA in considering cessation. ... CLAIMANT: No, that’s the only reason […] [47]   The RPD’s factual finding that the Applicant sought a Chinese passport prior to abandoning her practice of Falun Gong was reasonable, as was its consideration of the presumption of reavailment and its application to the Applicant’s circumstances. ... She raises three arguments in this regard: (1) that the RPD gave no consideration to her subjective understanding of the effect that her return trips to China would have on her permanent resident status in light of the 2012 amendments to the IRPA (Cerna v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2015 FC 1074 at paras 18-20 (Cerna)); (2) that the RPD erred in finding that her explanation for her applications for a Chinese passport and trips to China were not relevant to voluntariness; and (3) that the RPD erred in finding that she had reavailed herself of the protection of China when she was compelled by the Chinese state to abandon her religious practice in order to return, thereby succumbing to continued persecution. [50]   The Respondent relies on the presumption that a refugee has reavailed themself of the protection of their country of origin when the refugee visits that country using a passport issued by the country’s government. ...

Decision under appeal [5]   Despite an appeal that asks 14 questions, there are only two components to the decision under consideration and a new application for an extension of time. ... Standards based on procedural fairness in administrative law or the consideration of [translation] “constitutional principles and fundamental rights” have nothing to do with the application of known principles to the issues at stake here. ... The decision under appeal provided as follows: [translation] Files T-1136-16, T-210-18 and T-766-18 are consolidated for consideration and determination; The time limits for filing the applicant’s response records relating to motions for security for costs were extended to 15 days from the date of the order. ...

Nevertheless, the Report concluded that those considerations did not outweigh the seriousness of her misrepresentation, including the fact that after her CEC application had been refused, “Ms Liu continued to list a shell company as her employer on her AFL Sponsorship application.” ... In other words, the misrepresentation had no actual or potential relevance to the visa officer’s consideration of the application in question. ... More specifically, she maintains that the seriousness of a misrepresentation must be assessed in terms of the extent of materiality, relevance and impact. [68]   I disagree. [69]   The Ribic factors were developed in the context of the Immigration Appeal Division’s assessment of whether sufficient H&C considerations exist to warrant special relief, in light of all of the circumstances of the case: Ribic v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1985] IABD No 4 (QL). ...