Search - consideration

Haynes declared bankruptcy a few months later. [5] The Respondent pleads that the difference between the fair market value of the property and the consideration paid by the Appellant was $491,000. ... Burns: [3] Failure to indicate expressly that all relevant considerations have been taken into account in arriving at a verdict is not a basis for allowing an appeal under s. 686(1)(a). ...

It contains the following clauses: "AND WHEREAS it is the intention of the purchasers to construct a Personal Care Home on the said lands and premises, above described, subject to approval by the City of Winnipeg and in particular the rezoning thereof; WITNESSETH that in consideration of the premises and of the sum of $1.00 and other good and valuable consideration paid by the purchasers to the vendor, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1.) ...

The relevant paragraphs of the ETA provide: 254(2) New housing rebate [purchased home]-- Where (c) the total (in this subsection referred to as the “total consideration”)  of all amounts, each of which is the consideration payable for the supply to the particular individual of the complex or unit or for any other taxable supply to the particular individual of an interest in the complex or unit, is less than $450,000, 256(2) Rebate for owner-built homes-- Where (b) the fair market value of the complex, at the time the construction or substantial renovation thereof is substantially completed, is less than $450,000, [13]         In order to receive the rebate on the provincial portion of the HST, the Appellant was required to file an Owner-Built application within the 2 year limit given in subsection 46(6) of the New Harmonized Value-Added Tax System Regulations No.2 to the ETA. ...

No exhaustive list has been compiled and perhaps no exhaustive list can be compiled of considerations which are relevant in determining that question, nor can strict rules be laid down as to the relative weight which the various considerations should carry in particular cases. ...

Canada (Minister of National Revenue) (2001), 213 F.T.R. 85. [18]            Here, the ministerial delegate considered the fact the applicant's annual gross income from 1996 onward was in excess of $30,000, that he was able to meet his monthly expenses without being in a deficit position, that he had nominal debt and substantial equity, and on the basis of those considerations, determined that the applicant had not established financial hardship. [19]            I am unable to conclude that his conclusion was not reasonably open to him, nor am I able to conclude that the decision was not exercised in good faith, that it was made in consideration of extraneous factors, or that there was any breach of procedural fairness. [20]            While I am sympathetic to the applicant who has since his teenage years paid his taxes in a timely manner until such time as he encountered this specific problem, in view of the standard of review, it is not open to me to interfere with the exercise of the ministerial delegate's discretion merely because I might have been inclined to exercise it differently had I been charged with the responsibility. [21]            Therefore, there is no basis upon which to warrant the Court's intervention, and the application for judicial review will be dismissed. ...

It invokes irrelevant considerations, failure to consider relevant considerations, fettering of discretion, disregard of legitimate expectations, improper purpose and bad faith. [9]      At this stage, I cannot say there is no serious question to be tried. [10]      However, in my view, Heritage is not entitled to the interim issue of a duty free shop licence because it has failed to meet the irreparable harm and balance of convenience tests. [11]      In my view, if Heritage's judicial review application succeeds, any damages which might flow from the illegal act would be compensable in damages in a quantifiable amount. [12]      More importantly, however, the balance of inconvenience favours the Minister particularly when the public interest is taken into account. ...

The applicant also seeks an Order directing the respondent to disclose the identity of importers of the drug into Canada in 1995, 1996 and 1997. [2]      The issues are whether the Minister fettered his discretion, relied on irrelevant considerations and erroneous findings of fact and ignored relevant evidence. [3]      The applicant submits that the Minister relied on his guidelines and did not review the individual case before him. ... Calow compiled on June 30, 1997, clearly indicates that the position of the applicant was reviewed and taken into consideration. ...

Rather, consideration should be given to the reasons for the delay and whether the applicant has an arguable case. ... As stated in Grewal at p. 272:      The underlying consideration, however, which as it seems to me, must be borne in mind in dealing with any application of this kind, is whether, in the circumstances presented, to do justice between the parties calls for the grant of the extension.               ...

. ·                     no consideration of arrears was given in respect of a TD Bank loan taken out in June 2009. ...   [19]            It is difficult to fault the Minister for concluding that the Applicant gave no consideration to this loan when the Applicant never put the loan in issue ...

Canada, docket T-375-08   Date: 20090910 Dossier: T-375-08 Référence: 2009 CF 895 ENTRE: LA PREMIÈRE NATION MALÉCITE DE VIGER ET ERNEST DANIEL NICOLAS, AUBIN JENNISS, PIERRE NICOLAS ET MARTINE BRUNEAU POURSUIVANT EN LEUR QUALITÉ DE MEMBRES DU CONSEIL DE BANDE DE LA PREMIÈRE NATION MALÉCITE DE VIGER, AGISSANT POUR ET AU NOM DE TOUS LES MEMBRES PASSÉS ET PRÉSENTS DE LA PREMIÈRE NATION MALÉCITE DE VIGER demandeurs     et   SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE DU CHEF DU CANADA défender esse       TAXATION DES DÉPENS – MOTIFS     L’OFFICIER TAXATEUR JOHANNE PARENT   [1]                Le 19 février 2009, la Cour (Madame la protonotaire Mireille Tabib) suspendait les procédures dans le présent dossier en considération de l’article 50.1 de la Loi sur les Cours fédérales. ... L’article 25 réclamé pour services rendus après jugement est refusé en considération du fait que l’ordonnance de la Cour du 17 décembre 2008, en vertu de laquelle des frais sont réclamés, ne peut être considérée comme un jugement contrairement à l’ordonnance du 19 février 2009 qui a apporté une solution définitive à l’affaire mais pour laquelle il n’y eut aucune attribution de frais. ...