Search - consideration

Chernin that patently did not take into consideration the bulk of the medical evidence available to him, was not reasonable. ... All of these considerations are thoroughly discussed in Air Canada v. ... While there may be cases where such an agreement would constitute a special circumstance justifying early intervention, I am reluctant to give it precedence over the important policy considerations which generally discourage such judicial interference at a point such as this. ...

The Applicant did not object to this affidavit and I did not reject it but I may be somewhat selective in resorting to it:  for example, the deponent makes the statement that he “took into consideration the criteria outlined in Information Circular 92-2…”.  ... One of these is: (c)           whether or not the taxpayer or employer has exercised a reasonable amount of care and has not been negligent or careless in conducting their affairs under the self-assessment system;     [12]            In the internal memoranda and in the recorded decisions, I see little evidence of consideration as to whether the Applicant has used reasonable care in the conduct of its affairs.  ... Some consideration might have been given as to the reasonability of a taxpayer delaying payment of a penalty while a request for relief was still pending ...

Article 5.2 of this research agreement provided that in consideration for the research activity conducted by the University of Ottawa, APCR would pay $2,944,482.93 to the University, in 24 equal monthly payments of $122,686.79, from March 1993 to March 1995. [3] On or about August 31, 1994, Revenue Canada began to audit APCR's tax return for its 1993 taxation year with regard, inter alia, to the investment tax credits claimed by APCR for scientific research and technical development expenditures incurred in connection with the research agreement. ... ISSUE [1] APCR essentially criticizes the Director for having illegally exercised his discretion by: a) failing to observe APCR's right to be fairly treated by denying it a meaningful right to be heard; b) erring in law by giving an unduly restrictive interpretation to the discretion conferred on him by subsections 220(2.1) and 220(3) of the Income Tax Act; and c) taking factors not relevant to the exercise of his discretion into consideration and refusing to consider factors relevant to the exercise of his discretion. ... Le Dain J. dealt with this question at some length and said, at p. 513: The Minister may validly and properly indicate the kind of considerations by which he will be guided as a general rule in the exercise of his discretion (see British Oxygen Co. ...

JUSTICE MacKAY BETWEEN:                                                                 ARTHUR HEEG                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Applicant                                                                         - and-                                          THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA                                                                                                                                         Respondent UPON application by the applicant for judicial review of, and an order setting aside, the decision made on behalf of the Minister of National Revenue to refuse the applicant's request for cancellation of interest, arrears and penalties in relation to Income Tax assessed, pursuant to section 220(3.1) of the Income Tax Act; UPON hearing counsel for the application and for the respondent in Regina, on September 26, 2002 when decision was reserved; and upon consideration of submissions then made;                                                                        ORDER IT IS ORDERED THAT the application is dismissed.                                                                                                                                                             ... The case did not warrant hardship consideration. Thus, the letter concluded, the case did not warrant cancellation of installment interest, late filing penalties or the arrears of interest assessed. [6]         In written submissions for the applicant it is said that the Director failed to properly consider the medical evidence that was before her and failed to properly apply provisions of section 220(3.1) of the Income Tax Act. ... Expressed in another way, the Court on review of the exercise of discretion must be persuaded that the decision maker acted in bad faith or ignored relevant facts or took irrelevant considerations into account, or that there was unfairness in the process. ...

There are fundamental matters which must be expressly addressed and, regardless of the standard of review (Issue 5), failure to deal with these considerations constitutes a reviewable error. [22]            Accordingly, this application for judicial review is allowed and an Order will be made referring the Grievance to another adjudicator for a fresh consideration.        ... SIMPSON BETWEEN:                                            JOHN KING                                                                                               Applicant                                                 - and-                  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA                                                                                           Respondent                                                ORDER UPON the Applicant's application for judicial review of a decision of an adjudicator dated May 11, 2000; AND UPON hearing counsel for both parties in Ottawa on June 7, 2001; AND UPON reserving my decision in order to give this matter further consideration. ...

Hundal submitted another request for relief, leading to a further consideration of their request. ... It merely confirms the assertions made by the accountant in his letter dated September 27, 1998. [19]      The third request for consideration was also unsuccessful. ... I have reviewed the guidelines in paragraph 11 of IC 92-1, and other factors I consider to be relevant to the consideration of this request:      It is reasonable to conclude that the taxpayer's request was made for the purposes of retroactive tax planning.      ...

The length of the period of the extension may also be a relevant consideration. The underlying consideration is to ensure that justice is done between the parties: Grewal v.Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) [1985] 2 F.C. 263.  The four-pronged test set out in Hennelly is a means to ensure the fulfillment of that underlying consideration. ...

The gravamen of this submission is that this present request for relief was not considered on its merits because the Delegate viewed the “one time” relief as foreclosing consideration of the current request ... During the second review, the taxpayer will have the opportunity to make more representations for the CRA's consideration. ... Au cours du second examen, le contribuable aura la possibilité de soumettre des observations supplémentaires que l'ARC prendra en considération. ...

A November 18, 2009 letter explained the considerations behind the final decision to deny her request for relief.  ... While these subjective factors form part of the considerations that the Minister may take into account, at issue is the reasonableness of the error, objectively assessed, where the applicant’s case falters ...   [20]            These considerations are not germane to the review of the exercise of the discretion under section 204.1(4).  ...

The Pension Centre attributed great importance to the wording of the contracts, which provided [translation] “that there was no employer-employee relationship and that no such relationship was anticipated in the future”. [18]            It is true that there is no antinomy between the common law and civil law criteria and that a court would not err in taking into consideration common law criteria (Grimard, at paras 27-43). However, in the case at bar, the Pension Centre did not merely take the common law criteria into consideration: it applied them without considering the provisions of the CCQ. ... This decision is for the Pension Centre to make, and it must do so in consideration of these reasons. [22]            In closing, I would add that it is an error to conclude that, in the case of some of the contracts that bound her to Environment Canada, the applicant acted through a separate entity. ...