Search - considered

Lussier’s arguments, it is not unreasonable for the officer to have considered the balance of eligibility criteria once Mr. ...

In my opinion, however, the provisions of Section 21(2) of the Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1927, c. 1, negative any such inference, that section being as follows: “21. (2) The amendment of any Act shall not be deemed to be or to involve a declaration that the law under such Act was, or was considered by Parliament to have been, different from the law as it has become under such Act as so amended.” ...

C.R. 265; [1949] C.T.C. 229, in which the President of this Court considered the first Archer-Shee case and followed the principles therein laid down. ...

It is only if Section 4(h) is not applicable that Section 4(e) need be considered. ...

If no such settlement was reached, the Board had a discretion to pay the claimants such amount in settlement as it considered just and equitable. ...

I have also considered Re Drummond Estate; Minister of Finance for British Columbia v. ...

For 1945 the "reserve" of $13,230.07 was arrived at by adding together the profit element which it had lost on all the goods which had been returned to it in the last three months of the 1945 fiscal period, it being considered that the same percentage of goods delivered in the fiscal year of 1945 would be returned after January 31, 1945, and that the precise number of such returns would not be accurately ascertained until three months of the new fiscal year had elapsed. ...

Both were considered computers. [37] Apart from the question as to personal usage of, in particular the Apple Watch, both claimed Apple products are viewed by the respondent to be capital assets, and hence not deductible as claimed. ...

The Court has considered four options. The first is to seal the entire file. ...

In Jabel Image Concepts Inc v Canada, [2000] GSTC 45, the Federal Court of Appeal wrote at paragraph 12: When an Act uses different words in relation to the same subject such a choice by Parliament must be considered intentional and indicative of a change in meaning or a different meaning. [22] In the case of paragraphs 254(2)(b) and (g), it must be presumed Parliament intentionally chose to make a distinction when it used the words “primary place of residence” in paragraph (b) and “place of residence” in paragraph (g). ...