Search - consideration

He did not change his driver’s licence because he was too busy. [50]         He did not have to notify any credit card companies of a change of address because he did not have any credit cards; his credit was bad. [51]         Yusuf was not happy when he had to move out but concluded he had to move out  and let the Appellant and her family come back to 215 Shirrick  for the safety of his niece and nephew given “. . . the way they explained it to me what was going on in that neighbourhood”. [8] [52]         Moving out also led to his breaking up with his girlfriend and he moved back to where he was living before, his parents’ house. [53]         I do not accept substantial portions of the evidence of the Appellant and her witnesses and, as a consequence, I do not accept that the Appellant and her family moved into 161 Shirrick; I also do not accept that the Appellant bought 161 Shirrick with the intention of using it as the family’s principal place of residence. [54]         The considerations set out below, when considered collectively, make the Appellant’s evidence quite unlikely. [55]         It seems unlikely that the Appellant would have been unaware of a noise issue before closing if she intended to move to the house ...

Consideration of written submissions regarding the redetermination of certain issues further to a status hearing held by telephone conference call on September 13, 2016, at Ottawa, Ontario   The Honourable Mr. ...

She found that the pivotal or “controversial” issue in the enforcement motion and in the motion before her was the “accuracy, truth and origin of the non-capital losses in Schedule A”: Reasons at para. 23. [8]                This led to a consideration of Rule 72 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) SOR/90-688a, (the Rules) which permits the use of statements based on information and belief in an affidavit for use on a motion providing that the source of the information and the fact of the belief are specified in the affidavit. ...

T-2, which directs the TCC to conduct the appeal “as informally and expeditiously as the circumstances and considerations of fairness permit”. ...

The main principles that were highlighted in those reasons include the following: (a)   a lump sum may be awarded after consideration of the amounts at issue together with the complexity and the importance of those issues, the work generated and a party’s success (Scavuzzo v The Queen, 2006 TCC 90, 2006 DTC 2311, Dickie v The Queen, 2012 TCC 327, 2012 DTC 1276, and Blackburn Radio Inc. v The Queen, 2013 TCC 98, 2013 DTC 1098); (b)   the court must consider the Rule 147(3) factors although the amounts and complexity of the issues alone may not be a reason for departing from the costs set out in the Tariff (Jolly Farmer Products Inc. v The Queen, 2008 TCC 693, 2009 DTC 1040); (c)   there must be egregious circumstances for a court to consider an award of solicitor-client costs (Sommerer v The Queen, 2012 TCC 212, Transcript of Oral Reasons delivered by conference call on July 14, 2011); (d)  increased costs generally vary between 50 to 75 percent of solicitor‑client costs (Zeller Estate v The Queen, 2009 TCC 135, 2009 DTC 1106); (e)   increased costs are not meant to be punitive (General Electric Capital Canada Inc. v The Queen, 2010 TCC 490, 2010 DTC 1353) but an award is not limited to instances of misconduct (Teelucksingh v The Queen, 2011 TCC 253, [2011] TCJ No. 476); and (f)   exceptional circumstances need not exist for an award of costs to move beyond the Tariff (Velcro Canada Inc. v The Queen, 2012 TCC 273, [2012] TCJ No.  219). [16]         The test for awarding solicitor‑client costs has been propounded by the Supreme Court of Canada in Young v. ...

However, it will always be essential for written contracts to be validated by facts; otherwise, these contracts will be removed from the analysis. [49]         In other words, the conditions, terms, and methods are factors that must reflect the terms of the written contracts; otherwise, the Court will conduct its analysis based on the facts and will not take the written contracts into consideration. [50]         In this case, the preponderance of evidence is to the effect that the facts related to how the work was performed are in no way consistent with the content of the written contracts. [51]         The Intervener's representative, Mr.  ...

If so, then the considerations described by the Court in paragraphs 54 and 55 do not have to be analyzed.                                     ...

The over-arching consideration is not whether the decision below is right or wrong, but whether it is reasonable or unreasonable. ...

Commissions totalling $98,733.75 (the "Total Commission") were payable by Orfus Investments to the Appellant on February 1, 1990, in consideration for the negotiation of the Lease. 3. ...

Repairs are not taken into consideration in determining whether a substantial renovation has taken place and may not be included in a new housing rebate claim. ...