Search - consideration

Results 501 - 510 of 2336 for consideration
FCTD

Angostura International Ltd. v. The Queen, 85 DTC 5384, [1985] 2 CTC 170 (FCTD)

There were provisions for the sale and purchase of inventory, supplies, equipment and other items for additional monetary consideration, which is not relevant to the issue. ... One consideration may point so clearly that it dominates other and vaguer indications in the contrary direction. ... Mandrel Industries v MNR, supra, held that a lump sum payment of $150,000 made in consideration of the assignment of an exclusive sales contract, which still had three years to run, was a non-deductible capital outlay made once and for all with a view to bringing into being an advantage for the enduring benfit of the trade in the sense that the payer could henceforth operate its own selling operation without being in breach of its previously existing exclusive sales contract. ...
FCTD

H.Y. Louie Co. Ltd. v. The Queen, 86 DTC 6228, [1986] 1 CTC 499 (FCTD)

In consideration therefor, the Company shall pay to the Manager the sum of FOUR THOUSAND ($4,000.00) DOLLARS at the begining of each month starting the day that the building permit is issued and to continue until the total sum paid is FORTY-EIGHT THOUSAND ($48,000.00) DOLLARS, as a Manager’s fee. 3. ... In consideration therefore the Investor and the Manager shall each receive and agree to purchase 50% of the issued common shares of the Company. 9. ... It is true that in those cases the conclusion that the acquisition of mortgages at a discount was a speculation, not an investment, rests upon a consideration of the large number of operations of a similar nature that were effected. ...
FCTD

Pe Ben Industries Co. Ltd. v. The Queen, 88 DTC 6347, [1988] 2 CTC 120 (FCTD)

Subsection 14(1) of the Act provided, at the relevant time, as follows: 14 (1) Where, as a result of a transaction occurring after 1971, an amount has become payable to a taxpayer in a taxation year in respect of a business carried on or formerly carried on by him and the consideration given by the taxpayer therefor was such that, if any payment had been made by the taxpayer after 1971 for that consideration, the payment would have been an eligible capital expenditure of the taxpayer in respect of the business, there shall be included in computing the taxpayer's income for the year from the business the amount, if any, by which '/2 of the amount so payable (which /2 is hereafter in this section referred to as an “eligible capital amount” in respect of the business) exceeds the taxpayer's cumulative eligible capital in respect of the business immediately before the amount so payable became payable to the taxpayer. The consideration given by the plaintiff was its forbearance to insist on performance of the contract through shipping of the full traffic commitment. ... However, I am obliged by subsection 14(1) to determine the nature of any payment that would have been made by the plaintiff for that consideration if it had been the payor. ...
FCTD

Busby v. The Queen, 86 DTC 6018, [1986] 1 CTC 147 (FCTD)

In consideration of this and because of their special relationship, Rauball set about to make some money for the plaintiff by way of a series of stock options. ... Distinguishing this case from Phaneuf, there was no element of gift, personal bounty or of considerations extraneous to Mrs. ... To conclude on this point, it is my opinion that the benefits received by the plaintiff from the stock options were not in respect of her employment but instead were received by her as a person for considerations extraneous to such employment, namely, the guaranteeing of loans and, more particularly, her special relationship with Wolfgang Rauball. ...
FCTD

Rolls-Royce (Canada) Ltd. v. The Queen, 91 DTC 5579, [1991] 2 CTC 252 (FCTD), aff'd 93 (DTC) 5031 (FCA)

The tax considerations in this action arise only out of the operation in which the customer's engine is removed from the aircraft, overhauled and then replaced in the same customer's aircraft. ... As already indicated Strayer, J. concluded that the most important of the above considerations was the fact that the work was done to a chattel which the customer owned throughout and this, he noted, distinguished the Crown Tire case from those involved in many of the decided cases where the customer had never previously owned any part of the end product. ... Finally, Reed, J. acknowledged that the significant factor in the Crown Tire case was the fact that the chattel, upon which the work was done, was a chattel which the customer owned throughout and that that factor was not applicable in the Halliburton case which was then under her consideration. ...
FCTD

McAllister Drilling Ltd. v. The Queen, 95 DTC 5001, [1994] 2 CTC 211 (FCTD)

Tax Considerations — holdings When Holdings was incorporated in 1977 Roy's sons asked McLean and Alexander for suggestions about incorporating a company and about an appropriate percentage payment for Drilling. ... He frankly admitted that tax is normally a consideration but that, in this situation, tax issues were not a focus and were not discussed. ... He said that therewere no discussions about taxes although he acknowledged that Alexander must have taken taxes into consideration. ...
FCTD

Arif (Re), 2011 DTC 5173 [at at 6284], 2011 FC 1000

  [2]                Malika Afsahi is jointly and severally liable for her spouse’s tax debts because he transferred the family home to her without consideration in July 2009, when he had a tax debt ... Arif transferred the ownership of their family home to his spouse without consideration. ... Transfer of the family home and sale of the remaining assets [36]            On July 29, 2009, Noureddine Arif transferred ownership of the family residence to his spouse without consideration. ...
FCTD

Paqueo v. Canada (Customs and Revenue Agency), 2005 FC 38

At the trial level Mr Justice Pinard, in reconsidering a status review dismissal Order, adopted and summarized elements from the respondent's submissions, which are pertinent considerations to be applied to any party who has an obligation to move a matter forward: 4.        ... a)         The appellant has taken no positive steps to move the action forward beyond vague assurances that he would begin gathering documents, contacting witnesses and drafting settlement proposals, none of which have yet occurred.         ... The balance of the elements, taking into consideration both Baroud (supra) and the more liberal approach in Precision Drilling (supra) are largely irrelevant, for Mr Paqueo, while having good intentions, proposes nothing by which to move his judicial review towards a conclusion. [21]            In his affidavit sworn 19 November 2004 Mr Paqueo repeats the bare advice about his illness and his inability to retain counsel, because of the costs and then goes on to set out that: 4.          ... CONSIDERATION [27]               The Applicant has had the benefit of opportunities, suggestions and accommodations during the case management process. ...
FCTD

Janda Products Canada Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue), 2004 FC 1516

F-11 applies to supplies made by coin-operated amusement devices that are equipped with a continuous play feature, as defined in the Partial Agreed Statement of Facts herein; and (ii)           The "Centipede" and "Road Riot" games, referred to in paragraph 5 of the Affidavit of Rajwinder Sanhu, sworn November 17, 2003, can be and were set to accept only one quarter as the consideration. 2.              ... The relevant provision, subsection 165.1(2), states: 165.1(2) Where the consideration for a supply of tangible personal property or a service is paid by depositing a single coin in a mechanical coin-operated device that is designed to accept only a single coin of twenty-five cents or less as the total consideration for the supply and the tangible personal property is dispensed from the device or the service is rendered through the operation of the device, the tax payable in respect of the supply is equal to zero. 165.1(2) La taxe payable relativement à la fourniture d'un bien meuble corporel distribué, ou d'un service rendu, au moyen d'un appareil automatique à fonctionnement mécanique qui est conçu pour n'accepter, comme contrepartie totale de la fourniture, qu'une seule pièce de monnaie de 0,25 $ ou moins est nulle. [5]         The remission order was enacted on March 29, 1999, apparently in response to Distribution Lévesque Vending (1986) Ltée. v. ... That section states: 31. (1) Except as otherwise provided in any other Act of Parliament and subject to subsection (2), the laws relating to prejudgment interest in proceedings between subject and subject that are in force in a province apply to any proceedings against the Crown in any court in respect of any cause of action arising in that province. (2) A person who is entitled to an order for the payment of money in respect of a cause of action against the Crown arising outside any province or in respect of causes of action against the Crown arising in more than one province is entitled to claim and have included in the order an award of interest thereon at such rate as the court considers reasonable in the circumstances, calculated (a) where the order is made on a liquidated claim, from the date or dates the cause of action or causes of action arose to the date of the order; or (b) where the order is made on an unliquidated claim, from the date the person entitled gave notice in writing of the claim to the Crown to the date of the order. 31. (1) Sauf disposition contraire de toute autre loi fédérale, et sous réserve du paragraphe (2), les règles de droit en matière d'intérêt avant jugement qui, dans une province, régissent les rapports entre particuliers s'appliquent à toute instance visant l'État devant le tribunal et dont le fait générateur est survenu dans cette province. (2) Dans une instance visant l'État devant le tribunal et dont le fait générateur n'est pas survenu dans une province ou dont les faits générateurs sont survenus dans plusieurs provinces, les intérêts avant jugement sont calculés au taux que le tribunal estime raisonnable dans les circonstances et: a) s'il s'agit d'une créance liquide, depuis la ou les dates du ou des faits générateurs jusqu'à la date de l'ordonnance de paiement; b) si la créance n'est pas liquide, depuis la date à laquelle le créancier a avisé par écrit l'État de sa demande jusqu'à la date de l'ordonnance de paiement. (3) When an order referred to in subsection (2) includes an amount for, in the Province of Quebec, pre-trial pecuniary loss or, in any other province, special damages, the interest shall be calculated under that subsection on the balance of the amount as totalled at the end of each six month period following the notice in writing referred to in paragraph (2)(b) and at the date of the order. (4) Interest shall not be awarded under subsection (2) (a) on exemplary or punitive damages; (b) on interest accruing under this section; (c) on an award of costs in the proceeding; (d) on that part of the order that represents pecuniary loss arising after the date of the order and that is identified by a finding of the court; (e) where the order is made on consent, except by consent of the Crown; or (f) where interest is payable by a right other than under this section. (5) A court may, where it considers it just to do so, having regard to changes in market interest rates, the conduct of the proceedings or any other relevant consideration, disallow interest or allow interest for a period other than that provided for in subsection (2) in respect of the whole or any part of the amount on which interest is payable under this section. (6) This section applies in respect of the payment of money under judgment delivered on or after the day on which this section comes into force, but no interest shall be awarded for a period before that day. (3) Si l'ordonnance de paiement accorde une somme, dans la province de Québec, à titre de perte pécuniaire antérieure au procès ou, dans les autres provinces, à titre de dommages-intérêts spéciaux, les intérêts prévus au paragraphe (2) sont calculés sur le solde du montant de la perte pécuniaire antérieure au procès ou des dommages-intérêts spéciaux accumulés à la fin de chaque période de six mois postérieure à l'avis écrit mentionné à l'alinéa (2)b) ainsi qu'à la date de cette ordonnance. (4) Il n'est pas accordé d'intérêts aux termes du paragraphe (2): a) sur les dommages-intérêts exemplaires ou punitifs; b) sur les intérêts accumulés aux termes du présent article; c) sur les dépens de l'instance; d) sur la partie du montant de l'ordonnance de paiement que le tribunal précise comme représentant une perte pécuniaire postérieure à la date de cette ordonnance; e) si l'ordonnance de paiement est rendue de consentement, sauf si l'État accepte de les payer; f) si le droit aux intérêts a sa source ailleurs que dans le présent article. (5) Le tribunal peut, s'il l'estime juste, compte tenu de la fluctuation des taux d'intérêt commerciaux, du déroulement des procédures et de tout autre motif valable, refuser l'intérêt ou l'accorder pour une période autre que celle prévue à l'égard du montant total ou partiel sur lequel l'intérêt est calculé en vertu du présent article. (6) Le présent article s'applique aux sommes accordées par jugement rendu à compter de la date de son entrée en vigueur. ...
FCTD

Case v. Canada (Attorney General), 2004 FC 825

Canada (Customs and Revenue Agency), 2003 D.T.C. 5338, 2003 FCT 688. [23]            The respondent submits that the applicant has not established that its discretion was exercised for an improper purpose or that irrelevant considerations were used. ... When applying the pragmatic and functional approach, consideration must be given to four contextual factors: (1) the presence or absence of a privative clause or a statutory right of appeal; (2) the expertise of the tribunal relative to that of the reviewing court on the issue in question; (3) the purpose of the legislation and the provision in particular; and (4) the nature of the question- law, fact or mixed law and fact (see Voice Construction Ltd. v. ... Edison, supra does not assist the applicant in the case at bar. [45]            A review of the file material in this case does not show any breach of procedural fairness nor that the Minister's discretion was exercised for an improper purpose or based on irrelevant considerations. [46]            The application for judicial review is, therefore, dismissed. [47]            There shall be no order as to costs.                                                ...

Pages