Search - consideration

I have given careful consideration to the appellant's counsel's submissions with regard to the meaning of "fair market value" as it is contained in section 160. ... Thus, the consideration received by the transferor must have the same value as the reduced value of the property transferred to the transferee's assets. ... It is incidentally very interesting to note that the consideration received for all three of the comparables in 1995 was less than the municipal assessment. ...

I am of the opinion that the principles, which were applied in the consideration of those cases can be justified in the present appeal. ...   [63]     Unlike the facts in Manrell, RCI and CTVNS in this case are not receiving money in consideration of an obligation not to compete. ... Those three non‑competition agreements were the subject of the Settlement and were cancelled in consideration of the $12 million. ...

  [13]          It is important to note at the outset that the terms of the agreement on the management of the initial investments are not all clear and precise, particularly those relating to the consideration for the funds invested. ... PAYMENT OF THE CONSIDERATION   The acquittance is granted in consideration of the following:   FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000.00), to be by means of five bank cheques made out to Benoît Beaudin, commencing April 15, 2005, and continuing to August 15, 2005.   ...   [70]          What was to have been the consideration for the $350,000 investment? ...

First, it is contended that there was no gift but rather a transfer for consideration. ... The deeds of gift refer to no consideration and I am unable to accept that the extinguishment of the debt of $3,293,000 on the transfer of the properties to Felsen, by reason of the doctrine of merger, constituted consideration within the generally accepted meaning of that term [4]. ... The classic definition of consideration is contained in Lord Dunedin's speech in Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company, Limited v. ...

(f) Traditional, Economic, Social and Cultural Considerations [49]   The Notices of Appeal filed by Mr. ... (vi) Traditional, Economic, Social and Cultural Considerations [92]   Although there was no evidence of any traditional, social or cultural considerations that may have been relevant in determining the situs of the employment income of Mr. ... Smoke, in their submissions they raised an economic consideration. As noted above, it is the position of Mr.  ...

Argument of counsel for the respondent [98] The respondent never alleged that the payer was a sham company, but it was in fact entirely and exclusively controlled by the appellant. [99] Moreover, the appellant had registered his trade name before transferring it to the payer. [100] According to the financial statements, $750 is still owed on the payer's shares. [101] Section 25 of the Canada Business Corporations Act reads as follows: 25. (1) [Issue of shares] Subject to the articles, the by-laws and any unanimous shareholder agreement and to section 28, shares may be issued at such times and to such persons and for such consideration as the directors may determine. (2) [Shares non-assessable] Shares issued by a corporation are non-assessable and the holders are not liable to the corporation or to its creditors in respect thereof. (3) [Consideration] A share shall not be issued until the consideration for the share is fully paid in money or in property or past services that are not less in value than the fair equivalent of the money that the corporation would have received if the share had been issued for money. (4) [Consideration other than money] In determining whether property or past services are the fair equivalent of a money consideration, the directors may take into account reasonable charges and expenses of organization and reorganization and payments for property and past services reasonably expected to benefit the corporation. (5) [Definition of "property"] For the purposes of this section, "property" does not include a promissory note or a promise to pay. ... Gomery of the Superior Court wrote (at p. 1853): "The issuance of the shares for an inadequate consideration made them a nullity, and the certificates in Respondent's possession are worthless pieces of paper". [103] There is no evidence that the appellant was reimbursed by the payer for the initial payment made on the skidder. [104] The sureties provided by the appellant in support of the payer for $25,000, $6,500 and $6,500, were substantial and he was the only person to provide them. [105] It is clear from the invoices (Exhibit I-7) that the appellant did work free of charge outside the periods at issue: he received telephone calls and made deliveries of firewood throughout the year. [106] He provided wood to the payer free of charge and this was a big gift. [107] It is true that when the respondent doubted the information given by the appellant he used the words [TRANSLATION] "allegedly" or "alleged", but there is nothing wrong in that. [108] The word [TRANSLATION] "alleged" was used in subparagraph (f) above because even in 1995 the shares of the other shareholders had not been paid for yet. [109] In subparagraph (j) the appellant admitted at the hearing that it was he who hired and fired staff; moreover, in his statutory declaration (Exhibit I-11) Jean-Pierre St-Laurent said that it was the appellant who looked after running the business. [110] It is clear that the payer could not have existed without the appellant, and in making a decision the facts must be looked at as a whole. [111] In Carmelo Scalia v. ...

Canada (Min. of Employment and Immigration), [1985] 2 F.C. 263 that the underlying consideration in an application to extend time is to ensure that justice is done between the parties. The above stated four-pronged test is a means of ensuring the fulfillment of the underlying consideration. ... In my opinion, the Appellant was successful in showing the Court he had an arguable case since, as indicated above, a successful party has a presumptive right to substantial indemnity costs, provided all the requirements of subsection   147(3.1) of the Rules are met (Venngo, supra). [40]   Furthermore, I   am of the view that consideration should be given to the purpose of subsection   147(3.1) of the Rules which is to encourage parties to settle wherever possible (Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada v The Queen, 2015   TCC   171 at para   8, 2015  DTC 1159 [Sun Life]). [41]   For these reasons, and in order to ensure that justice is done between the parties, which is the underlying consideration in an application to extend time, I   will grant the motion for an extension of time for the Appellant to make submissions for enhanced costs. 3.   ...

About a month later, Products transferred its CAHL shares to Holdings and received the one and only common share of Holdings as consideration therefor. ... It would seem to follow that consideration of legislative purpose may not only resolve patent ambiguity, but may, on occasion, reveal ambiguity in apparently plain language.” ... Canada has agreed with its treaty partners that, if a resident of one of those countries becomes subject to the Canadian tax régime, further specific Canadian tax considerations will apply. ...

He finally said that his father had transferred them to him for consideration of $1 a share ...   [45]          The minutes of March 20, 2001, provided for the issue of shares in the Payor as follows:   Subscriber Number & class of shares Nature of consideration Total consideration         Yvon Lepage 23 Class A shares Cash 23.00 Frédéric Lepage 29 Class A shares Cash 29.00 Gaétane Beaulieu 48 Class A shares Cash 48.00   [46]          Each of those parties obtained shares directly from the Payor ...

Where discrimination has been found and breaches of section 15(1) have occurred (and where section 15(2) is not applicable)- any justification or consideration of the reasonableness of the enactment, or an consideration of factors which could justify the discrimination and support the constitutionality of the impugned enactment could take place under section 1 of the Charter (underlining added).             ... Where the Court is called upon to determine a discrimination claim under subsection 15(1) of the Charter, it should make these three broad inquiries: (a)         Does the impugned law draw a formal distinction between the claimant and others based on one or more personal characteristics, or fail to take into account the claimant's already-disadvantaged position in Canadian society resulting in substantively differential treatment between the claimant and others based on one or more personal characteristics; (b)         Is the claimant subject to differential treatment based on one or more enumerated or analogous grounds; (c)         Does the differential treatment discriminate by imposing a burden upon or withholding a benefit from the claimant in a way that reflects the stereotypical application of presumed group or personal characteristics or which otherwise has the effect of perpetuating or promoting the view that the individual is less capable or worthy of recognition or value as a human being or as a member of Canadian society equally deserving of concern, respect and consideration.... ... The issue is not whether distinctions are made in legislation, but whether the effect of the legislation is discriminatory on an individual or group because it either imposes a burden or withholds a benefit from that individual or group because of a relevant personal characteristic in a way that makes the individual or group less worthy of concern, respect or consideration. ...