Search - consideration

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. ...

His own consideration and that of his consultants was that repeat surgery was hazardous and potentially not of benefit. ... Your favorable consideration of this patient's application would be of benefit to all patients and to reducing health care costs. [4] The Appellant's Notice of Appeal, which was obviously prepared by his spouse, stated: Alternative medicine should be allowed as a medical expense in my husband's case considering that a second, high-risk open-heart surgery would cost thousands of dollars under our Medicare system, with no guarantee of continuing quality of life. ...

Where paragraph 160(1) of the Act applies, the transferee and transferor are jointly and severally liable for any tax that the transferor was liable to pay in or in respect to the year of transfer or in any preceding taxation years, to the extent that the value of the property transferred exceeds the fair market value of the consideration received therefor. To succeed in her appeal, the Appellant had to show that lawful consideration was given for the property transferred, in other words, that she reimbursed the loans in full ...

Because when they are faced with an audit, and it’s an indescribable mess, they claim that there was, in his case, a flood, and he insisted on that a great great great deal, they offer various explanations in order to try in some way to get a little consideration from the persons performing the audit. ... And you will understand that I refuse, I outright refuse to condone such confusion, such incoherence by taking into consideration the explanations that, in my opinion, remain unclear and confused.  ...

John’s, Newfoundland;             And upon consideration of the written submissions of the parties;             The motion is dismissed in accordance with the attached Reasons for Order.             ... Sagaz Industries Canada Inc., 2001 SCC 59 (SCC) sets forth the test to be applied in consideration of reopening a trial.   1.       ...

There was consideration passing from him to the company which leads to the second relevant determination as to whether or not the company remunerated him for those services. ... So there being evidence that there was consideration flowing from Mr. ...

In assessing the Appellant and in confirming the Assessment, the Minister assumed the same facts as follows:   a)         The Appellant’s spouse, Emilio Quinn Verna, passed away on August 27, 2000;   b)         Carlo Verna is the brother of the Appellant’s spouse;   c)         Lia Sambrielaz is the sister of the Appellant’s spouse;   d)         Andy Sambrielaz, the Corporation’s accountant, is married to Lia;   e)         Prior to the death of the Appellant’s spouse, the Appellant, her spouse and her brother-in-law Carlo held the following percentage of shares of the Corporation:     % of the shares of the Corporation held Appellant 25% Appellant’s spouse 25% Carlo 50%               f)          After the death of the Appellant’s spouse, the Appellant and her brother-in-law each held 50% of the shares of the Corporation;   g)         Prior to the death of the Appellant’s spouse, the Appellant and Carlo were both directors of the Corporation;   h)         Prior to the death of the Appellant’s spouse, Carlo was an officer of the Corporation, holding the position of Secretary;   i)          The fiscal year end of the Corporation is August 31 st;   j)          On or about August 31, 2001, the Corporation paid dividends to the Appellant and Carlo as follows:     Actual Taxable Recipient           Dividend Dividend Appellant $24,000.00 $33,000.00 Carlo Verna $24,000.00 $33,000.00   k)         In 2001, the Appellant and Carlo each received a dividend from the Corporation as stated in paragraph j), above;   l)          The Appellant and Carlo acted in concert to direct the Corporation to issue the dividends to its shareholders in 2001;   m)        The Corporation issued the Appellant a T5 information slip for the 2001 taxation year as follows:   Actual Dividend           Taxable Dividend Dividend Tax Credit $24,000.00 $30,000.00 $4,000.00   n)         On filing her return of income for the 2001 taxation year, the Appellant included the taxable portion of the dividend she received from the Corporation in the computation of income and claimed the dividend tax credit to reduce her tax liability;   o)         The Corporation did not receive any consideration in regard to the transfer of property to the Appellant, by way of paid dividends in 2001 in the amount of $24,000.00 (the “Property”);   p)         The aggregate of all amounts that the Corporation was liable to pay under the Act in respect of the taxation year in which the Property was transferred or any preceding taxation year was not less than $12,002.79 as follows:       Fiscal Year End   Tax Arrears Interest Instalment Interest   Total August 31, 2001 $7,890.68 $3,672.43 $439.68 $12,002.79   q)         The Corporation did not owe a debt to the Appellant immediately prior to the transfer of the Property; and   r)          As at fiscal year ending August 31, 2000, the Appellant’s spouse and Carlo owed the Corporation $151.94 and $41,171.52, respectively.   ... He submits that the Minister properly assessed the Appellant pursuant to subsection 160(1) of the Act on the basis that the Appellant is jointly and severally liable with the Corporation for the Corporation’s liability to pay tax under the Act because the Corporation transferred the Property to the Appellant for no consideration when there was a tax liability for the Corporation for the year of transfer.   12.       ...

  [3]               The Respondent opposes the motions on the grounds that the Court lacks jurisdiction to grant the relief sought either because the Court cannot grant declaratory relief or because the Court may only order that assessments be vacated or varied after consideration of the correctness of the assessments ...   [8]               The Appellants, who are self‑represented, have not framed their applications in terms of subsection 58(1) of the Rules but this alone should not be a bar to a consideration of the motions where it is apparent which section of the Rule s is properly applicable ...

It is in that light that the Court must take into consideration all the circumstances of the case which, in its view, militate in favour or against the granting of the motion. ... He must also take into consideration the difficulty and importance of the proposed questions of law, the desirability that they not be answered in a "vacuum", and the possibility that the determination of the questions before trial might, in the end, save neither time nor expense. 7   [8]      The question as framed by the parties involves an important principle of law which is not confined to the facts of these appeals but will impact on other transfer pricing cases. ...

The Minister of National Revenue, [1968] S.C.R. 728, Chief Justice Cartwright of the Supreme Court of Canada made the following comments in relation to a situation where a mortgage was granted by a husband to his wife and the husband claimed that the amounts payable under the mortgage were alimony:   I agree that these documents which were prepared contemporaneously and relate to the same transaction should be read together; but, so reading them, it appears that the agreement between the parties was not that the husband should pay his wife a periodic allowance for maintenance and that his agreement to do so should be collaterally secured by a second mortgage; it was rather a release by her of all her claims for an allowance and the giving by her (in para. 4 of the agreement) of an irrevocable power of attorney to bar her dower in her husband's lands in exchange for a single consideration, the giving of the mortgage for $45,000. ... In consideration of this payment the respondent was released by the wife "from any further liability" under the said judgment ...