Search - consideration

Results 171 - 180 of 2335 for consideration
FCTD

New Continental Oil Company of Canada Limited v. Her Majesty the Queen, [1976] CTC 44, 76 DTC 6038

What was disposed of was disposed of in 1966 and the consideration of $368,832.16 was received in that year and has been assessed to the plaintiff as income for the fiscal period in which it was received. ... The sale was in consideration of a drilling commitment and provided, in the event of success, for the equal division of the net proceeds of production between the syndicate and the plaintiff. ... It is clear that the contingent obligations to make these payments were incurred in consideration of the plaintiff obtaining the right to explore and drill for oil and gas on particular pieces of property and in the second case perhaps in further consideration of the arrangement of financing. ...
FCTD

Minister of National Revenue v. Louis Bisson, [1972] CTC 446

The secretary proposed that it was in the interest of the Company to give immediate consideration to the revision of the Company’s agreement with Mr. ... The Party of the First Part doth hereby agree to sell and the Party of the Second Part doth hereby agree to purchase all and singular the beneficial interest of the Party of the First Part, into and out of 49,000 issued, outstanding and fully paid up common shares of Transport Urbain De Hull Ltée— Hull City Transport Ltd., at and for the consideration hereinafter more particularly expressed and the further consideration of ONE DOLLAR ($1.00), and further, for the purpose of buying the peace and good will of the said Party of the First Part, the Party of the Second Part agrees to pay to the Party of the First Part the sum of SIXTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($60,000.00) payable as follows:— Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) on the execution of the within agreement and Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) on the 1st day of May, 1954, and like sums of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) on the 1st day of May in each of the years 1955, 1956 and 1957; Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) on the 1st day of May, 1958, and a like sum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) on the 1st day of May in each and every year thereafter until the balance of the said sum of Sixty Thousand Dollars ($60,000.00) has been fully paid and satisfied, without interest; PROVIDED however, and it is hereby agreed between the parties hereto that should default occur in the payment of any of the aforementioned sums the then balance owing by the Party of the Second Part to the Party of the First Part in respect of such Sixty Thousand Dollars ($60,000.00), shall at the option of the Party of the First Part, forthwith become due and payable. 2. ... In consideration of the premises and other good and valuable consideration the said Party of the First Part doth hereby release and discharge the said Party of the Second Part of and from all liabilities, either contingent or actual, that may presently be existing from the Party of the second Part to the Party of the First Part and the said Party of the First Part agrees to and with the said Party of the Second Part to execute and deliver to the Party of the Second Part a general release for such liabilities or other liabilities in such form as may required (sic) by the solicitor for the said Party of the Second Part. 5. ...
FCTD

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Her Majesty the Queen, [1980] CTC 67, 80 DTC 6018

It was agreed by both parties that the arguments and legal considerations to be applied were absolutely identical to those in the aforesaid Bank of Nova Scotia case. ...
FCTD

Grant v. Minister of National Revenue, [1999] 2 CTC 103, 99 DTC 5146

Grant’s case; These considerations would be relevant in a situation such as that in which Mr. ...
FCTD

Portage Tax Services v. The Queen, 82 DTC 6104, [1982] CTC 95 (FCTD)

Any discounter who acquires a refund of tax the right to which was obtained for a consideration from the person entitled thereto and who fails to give notice forthwith to that person of the actual amount of the refund of tax by notice in writing, in the form and containing the information set out in Schedule II and sent to the person at the address of record obtained from that person as described in paragraph 4(1)(c), is guilty of an offence. ... Thus, subsection 2(1) reads: In this Act, “discounter means a person who acquires, for a consideration, a right to a refund of tax from a person entitled thereto; (italics mine) And the same words “acquires, for a consideration, a right to a refund of tax from a person entitled thereto, read in the context of the respective sections or subsections, appear in subsections 2(2), 3(1), 3(3), 4(1) and section 5, as earlier set out. And to further assure the discounter who acquires, for a consideration, a right to a refund of the tax from a person entitled thereto, the defendant caused to be sent to the discounter forms of Power of Attorney, three copies of each Power of Attorney to be completed by the discounter and signed by the taxpayer. ...
FCTD

Leonard Pipeline Contractors Ltd. v. Canada, docket T-2129-87

The purchase agreement as amended is silent with respect to the consideration to be given for those assets set out in paragraphs 3(d) and 3(e) above.               5.      In consideration of the sale of the benefit in the Pe Ben Agreement, the plaintiff entered into an agreement on January 1, 1978 (the Pe Ben Participation Agreement) with Leonard Pipeline Contractors Ltd. ... In consideration of the sale of the benefit in the A-S-L Agreement, the plaintiff entered into an agreement on January 1, 1978 (the A-S-L Participation Agreement) with Leonard Pipeline Contractors Ltd. ...
FCTD

Syal v. Canada (Attorney General), docket T-2213-98

Continuing on with the quote: 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. The judge"s findings that the Minister failed to inform the respondents of the factors that he would take into consideration in exercising his discretion and that he also failed to give them an opportunity to make representations in support of their requests are both clearly contrary to the evidence. ... I cannot conclude that irrelevant facts were taken into consideration, and, given the nature of the discretion on behalf of the Minister or that is vested in the Minister, I certainly cannot conclude that the decision is contrary to law. ...
FCTD

Arita v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2010 FC 1019

  [2] The request is connected with the application for leave and judicial review of a decision by a pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA) officer to remove the Applicants regardless of their application for exemption based on humanitarian and compassionate considerations (H&C application) ... Solicitor General, 2004 FC 1032, Justice Luc Martineau, as it appears in the following excerpts, dismissed the motion for a stay for lack of a serious issue, since the applicants had failed to provide a valid explanation for the late filing of the application for leave and judicial review [TRANSLATION]: [4]   Since the time extension is a precondition for consideration of their application for leave, the applicants must also, for the purposes of this application for a stay, demonstrate that the request for a time extension in their application for leave raises a serious issue. ... The Applicants have not established that there are any special considerations that could justify departing from this principle (see Wang v. ...
FCTD

Hunter v. Canada Revenue Agency, 2012 FC 1223

On the question of CRA delay, the Decision provides as follows: I have reviewed your file, including the reassessment made for 2001 and 2002 and the consideration of your Notices of Objection by Appeals Division. ... This is a factor cited in the Guidelines as a relevant consideration when considering whether her relief is warranted. ... However, I find that because the Minister’s Decision does not rely on the identified information, its existence is not a relevant consideration on the present Application ...
FCTD

Guevarra v. Canada (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship), 2019 FC 1449

I must, therefore, dismiss this application for judicial review. [6]   There are two issues: Was the officer’s consideration of Ms Hidalgo’s non-disclosure unreasonable? ... Issue One – Was the officer’s consideration of Ms Hidalgo’s non-disclosure unreasonable? [7]   Mr Guevarra argues that the officer gave undue consideration to his wife’s non-disclosure. ...

Pages