Search - consideration

The defendants continued to reside on the remaining 0.7 acre plus an adjacent 0.225 acre transferred to them by the City as part of the consideration for the 9.3 acres. ...

  [2] I will therefore proceed with the assessment of the bill of costs, taking into consideration the comments of my colleague in Dahl v. ...

    [4]                En considération pour la décision de la Cour dans l’affaire Rhéaume, de ma décision dans ce même dossier (2009 CF 946) et du caractère très raisonnable des frais encourus, j’allou e les frais de déplacement et hébergement tels que demandés ...

In consideration of the matter of costs the Order reads as follows:             “…1. ...

It was not mentioned at all to either body of the Board: he alleges that ties with his family pose a threat of harm to his person given that his family has been targeted by one of the main opponents of the current government. [11]            The Court takes into consideration the fact that the RPD denied his application in light of weaknesses in his testimony regarding his new faith. [12]            In addition, due to the applicant's lack of credibility, the RAD found that the applicant had failed to demonstrate that his family would persecute him, or even that his family would be intolerant of his alleged recent conversion. [13]            The RAD also noted in its decision, based on a review of the documentation, that Chad has a population composed of 53% Muslims, 20% Catholics and 14% Protestants. ...

Justice Shore BETWEEN: JEYLANI SHARIF MOWLANA Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION AND THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Respondents ORDER UPON motion on behalf of the Applicant for a stay of removal, scheduled for tomorrow, August 9, 2019, pending the determination of an application for leave and judicial review of a Pre-removal Risk Assessment decision; AND UPON having read and considered the written submissions, as well as having heard the oral submissions of both parties; Subsequent to consideration of the tripartite conjunctive criteria of the Toth v Canada test (Toth v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), (1988) 86 NR 302 (FCA)); RECOGNIZING that the standard of review of an enforcement officer’s decision is that of reasonableness, a strong case must exist within specific context under the circumstances; whereas, there is ample objective and subjective evidence to demonstrate serious peril to life and limb as shown herein (Baron v Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2009 FCA 81); ACKNOWLEDGING the higher standard in respect of serious issue on a matter of refusal to defer a stay; and recognizing, if a stay is granted, it has bearing on the underlying judicial review application (Wang v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2001 FCT 148, [2001] FCJ No 295 (TD)); RECOGNIZING the consequences of the Applicant’s crime of absconding food stamps, worth $200,000 committed in 2004 and for which he was convicted in 2011 (food stamps used in his store by which customers did benefit as did he with exchanges for the food stamps, in contravention of the food stamp scheme; the Applicant was sentenced to three years of probation and monthly restitution of food stamp value, which he made in monthly payments until his departure from the United States, when the Applicant was informed that he will be removed to his country of origin, Somalia); all of which the Court weighed against the background of serious peril to the Applicant’s life and limb, if he is returned to his country of origin. ...

If removed with her parents, Skarlett, who is receiving multi-faceted medical treatment by a team of seven medical practitioners with an extensive comprehensive integral multi-aspect therapy program (with documentation on file, demonstrating the severity of the child’s conditions which necessitate comprehensive multi-faceted treatment), will face a very grave deterioration of her condition. [8]   To that effect, it is incumbent to ensure consideration of evidence of the physician, Dr. ...

This application is related to an application for leave and for judicial review [ALJR] by the applicant concerning the pre-removal risk assessment [PRRA]. [2]   The applicant arrived in Canada as a temporary resident on April 3, 2016, for a period not exceeding six months. [3]   The applicant filed a refugee protection claim alleging persecution in her country because she is homosexual. [4]   Due to the lack of credibility, the refugee protection claim was rejected by the Refugee Protection Division. [5]   The applicant ’ s appeal was dismissed by the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD], again as a result of a lack of credibility, as the RAD did not believe applicant’s allegations. [6]   The ALJR of the RAD’s decision was also dismissed by this Court, which found that the RAD’s decision with respect to credibility and subjective fear was reasonable, in light of the applicant ’ s entire record. [7]   Following the previous proceedings, the application for humanitarian and compassionate considerations was rejected. [8]   In addition, the applicant ’ s PRRA application was also rejected. [9]   New evidence, arising after the previous proceedings, presented by the applicant and related, in her opinion, to her testimony and to her written evidence, which the decision-makers below have already found not to be credible, cannot be circumvented to argue that she faces a risk should she return to her country of origin. ...

But obviously, an important consideration in these matters is also the necessity to respect the scheduling of the Court that may be required in hearing these matters. ...

One of them requires further consideration. The garnishee's statement of claim indicates that the judgment debtor holds a retirement savings plan with it. ...