Search - consideration

This is no less true on judicial review. [36]   In this regard, “clarity” or a single reasonable outcome may be, in some cases, the result of a deferential review of a statutory interpretation decision, but it cannot be the premise of the exercise. [37]   Lastly, I note that reviewing statutory interpretation decisions may also involve the consideration of binding authority by the decision-maker: Céré v Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FC 221 at paragraphs 36–43; see also Paul Daly, “The Principle of Stare Decisis in Canadian Administrative Law” (2015) 49 RJTUM 757. ...

The evidence supporting the finding is presented as being: annual sales in Canada ($105,000 in 2012; $193,000 in 2013; $255,000 in 2014); labels bearing the DO GHAZAL & Design mark were attached to the products sold in Canada; commercial invoices for shipments of tea from the opponent to Canada between July 29, 2012 and June 13, 2014. [12]   Since was discharged the initial burden on the opponent of showing that the DO GHAZAL & Design trade-mark had become known in Canada sufficiently to negate the distinctiveness of the Mark, the Registrar went on to consider whether there would be confusion between the marks, because 164 must then show that the Mark is adapted to distinguish its goods from those of Akbar. [13]   The Registrar assessed confusion, taking into consideration all of the relevant surrounding circumstances, including the factors listed in section 6(5) of the Act: What to be considered Éléments d’appréciation 6(5) In determining whether trademarks or trade names are confusing, the court or the Registrar, as the case may be, shall have regard to all the surrounding circumstances including 6(5) En décidant si des marques de commerce ou des noms commerciaux créent de la confusion, le tribunal ou le registraire, selon le cas, tient compte de toutes les circonstances de l’espèce, y compris : (a) the inherent distinctiveness of the trademarks or trade names and the extent to which they have become known; a) le caractère distinctif inhérent des marques de commerce ou noms commerciaux, et la mesure dans laquelle ils sont devenus connus; (b) the length of time the trademarks or trade names have been in use; b) la période pendant laquelle les marques de commerce ou noms commerciaux ont été en usage; (c) the nature of the goods, services or business; c) le genre de produits, services ou entreprises; (d) the nature of the trade; and d) la nature du commerce; (e) the degree of resemblance between the trademarks or trade names, including in appearance or sound or in the ideas suggested by them. e) le degré de ressemblance entre les marques de commerce ou les noms commerciaux, notamment dans la présentation ou le son, ou dans les idées qu’ils suggèrent. [14]   Starting with the degree of resemblance, the Registrar acknowledges that the two trade-marks are identical in appearance and sound, as well as in the ideas suggested by the marks. ...

As part of the re-evaluation of an active ingredient, the PMRA takes into consideration recent developments and new information on the status of a pesticide in other jurisdictions.   ...

The April 2019 Decision bears the hallmarks of reasonableness, and I do not find any serious shortcomings in the Decision causing me to lose confidence in the outcome reached by the Minister’s Delegate. [63]   Having regard to all the circumstances of this matter and the parties, and upon consideration of the factors set forth in Rule 400(3) of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106, there will be no award of costs. ...

Were there any supplies that were made for nil consideration? If so, provide detailed listing including, type of supply, tax status, quantity, and recipient(s) information. ...

In my view, a second consideration by the Court of the Applicant’s request for a mandatory injunction will assist the ongoing application process by establishing parameters for the parties’ dispute regarding the Minister’s sequential audits of the Applicant’s GST/HST returns. 2. ...

In those cases, there was no evidence as to the status of parties as registrants under the Excise Tax Act, nor was consideration given to the applicable provisions of that statute, underlying the entitlement to an input tax credit (at paras 98-99). [49] In the case at hand, the availability of input tax credits has been raised. ...

This will be the case when the process (1) allows the judge to make the necessary findings of fact, (2) allows the judge to apply the law to the facts, and (3) is a proportionate, more expeditious and less expensive means to achieve a just result. [21] The test on a motion for summary judgment is not whether a party cannot possibly succeed at trial; rather, it is whether the case is so doubtful that it does not deserve consideration by the trier of fact at a future trial (Milano Pizza at para 33; Kaska Dena Council v Canada, 2018 FC 218 at paras 21, 23 (Kaska)). ...

Here, if the plaintiff establishes that its manufacturing activities fall within the definition in paragraph 2(1)(f), then it will be entitled to the consideration provided in section 26.1 for “similar goods". ...

This conclusion, in my opinion, is supported by the wording of the sections in question, by the jurisprudence of this Court, and by the policy considerations to which I have alluded. ...