Search - considered

., 1999 CarswellNat 111, counsel argued that the learned trial judge considered the educational background of the director. ... Analysis and Decision [126] In the Notice of Appeal counsel for the Appellant set forth various issues which he considered to be of consequence in this appeal, such as: Whether the Appellant was ever legally a director of the Company. ... In these circumstances one would have to conclude that such a director could very well be held liable on the basis that he had not met the standard of care required of a reasonable director under all of the circumstances. [163] The Court has also considered the case of Ferguson, supra, but this Court distinguishes that case from the facts in the present case. ...

McIntyre, 2012 NBQB 225, 27 C.P.C. (7th) 249 at para. 1. [3]    Redeemer Foundation v.Canada (National Revenue), 2008 SCC 46, [2008] 2 S.C.R. 643 at para. 25. [4]    2002 SCC 73, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 757 (“ Jarvis ”) at para. 95. [5]    Ibid. at para. 2. [6]    Ibid. at paras. 49 and 50. [7]    The federal GST refers to tax levied at the rate applicable to transactions that are considered to have been made in a non-harmonized province (currently 5%) and to tax levied at the various rates applicable to transactions that are considered to have been made in a harmonized province (for example, the current 13% rate applicable to transactions that are considered to have been made in New Brunswick). [8]    Supra at para. 51. [9]    Ibid. at para. 88. [10] Ibid. at paras. 93 and 94. [11] Daley Affidavit, Exhibit F- Exhibit A-21, Primary Report of Ron MacIntyre. [12] Daley Affidavit, Exhibit A, paragraph 1. [13] Daley Affidavit, Exhibit K- affidavit of David Daley sworn on September 1, 2006, Exhibit E, pages 16 to 19 (in Record on Motion, N.B. ...

  [10]            T he Chief Justice of the Federal Court requested the deputy judges, each of whom had held office as a judge of a superior court in Canada, to act as a judge of the Federal Court, pursuant to s. 10(1.1) of the Federal Courts Act and the corresponding order in council, P.C. 2003-1779, dated November 6, 2003. [1]   [11]            I will now turn to the first of the two principal questions to be considered.   ... They did not make such an enactment then, but we have the right to do it now. […] I am afraid we have no jurisdiction to extend it to other courts than the federal courts …   …   We have no right to deal with judges of the superior courts to the extent of restricting their tenure of office, but there is no such provision applicable to county court judges, who have not been considered as members of the superior or high courts ... In his view, the legislative and statutory history concerning the Exchequer Court, found in the debates of 1927 and 1960, is irrelevant because Parliament would not have considered it necessary to question whether an inferior court fell within the meaning of s. 99. ...

(Acting assignments, indefinite appointments, and internships will be considered.) ... If the Appeal Board concludes that the Selection Board met this requirement, it must dismiss the appeal even if it is of the opinion that, had it been responsible for the task entrusted to the Selection Board, the result might have been different If a Selection Board has performed its duty in accordance with the Act and regulations and has made an honest effort to choose the most deserving candidate, then an Appeal Board would be exceeding its authority if it allowed the appeal from the decision of the Selection Board on the grounds that the latter had not availed itself of the means considered by the Appeal Board to be most appropriate for the performance of its duty.   ... However, the other described behaviour may be considered to be important factors in order to make a team more aware. ...

As stated in Vriend v Alberta, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 493 at paras 59-60 [Vriend] [Plaintiffs’ emphasis]: [59]      The respondents contend that a deliberate choice not to legislate should not be considered government action and thus does not attract Charter scrutiny.  ... The question is whether, considered in the context of the [page 70] law and the litigation process, the claim has no reasonable chance of succeeding ...   [73]            I don’t think that when the Supreme Court of Canada, in Imperial Tobacco, above, said that the “question is whether, considered in the context of the law and the litigation process, the claim has no reasonable chance of success,” it meant to encourage the Court in a strike motion to decide points of statutory interpretation before hearing the evidence and full legal argument based upon that evidence. ...

They must prepare reports, from which information is used by CSC staff and other organizations to make decisions concerning security and the reintegration of inmates into society. [109]        The Union admits that employment in the public service, particularly in CSC, is considered a relatively regulated field (paragraph 31 of its memorandum). ... [128]        The Court will first address the AGC’s argument that this redress is premature. (1)                Premature redress [129]        The Court accepts the Commissioner’s position that the complaint process set out in paragraph 29(1)(h) of the Act should not be considered an adequate alternative remedy because the Commissioner’s findings and recommendations with respect to complaints are not binding and the Act does not provide for any subsequent recourse, requiring that the applicant file an application for judicial review to obtain a binding decision. ... The wording of subsequent laws should therefore be considered with caution. ...

The Provincial Tax Commission [4] the same argument made by the present respondent was also considered by this Court. ... If, therefore, the language and the aim of the English legislation was considered by the Privy Council to differ from the New South Wales legislation, as above pointed out, it can only be because of the presence of subsections 3 and 4 of section 15 and subsection 3 of section 27. ... Kirk [33], the Privy Council considered the provisions of the Land and Income Tax Assessment Act, 1895, of New South Wales. ...

It considered that this standard of care was unreasonably and unrealistically high. ... The Appellate Division considered that this standard of care was unreasonably and unrealistically high. ... To my mind, this last approach has much to commend it, as it provides a rationale as to why money is considered compensation for non-pecuniary losses such as loss of amenities, pain and suffering, and loss of expectation of life. ...

The Board’s decision to increase the assessed value based on the City’s submissions must be quashed because the Board considered information that it was statutorily prohibited from considering. ... We note, in this regard, the similarity between the wording of s. 470(5) and the statutory right of appeal that was considered in Pushpanathan v. ... Because the Board considered information that it was statutorily prohibited from considering, the Board’s decision to increase the assessed value based on the City’s submissions must be quashed. ...

Par conséquent, il convient de se prononcer sur le caractère raisonnable de cette décision. [94]   Le paragraphe 27 (1) de la Loi dispose : 27(1) Sous réserve du paragraphe (3), la personne ou l’organisme chargé de rendre, au nom du Service, une décision au sujet d’un délinquant doit, lorsque celui-ci a le droit en vertu de la présente partie ou des règlements de présenter des observations, lui communiquer, dans un délai raisonnable avant la prise de décision, tous les renseignements entrant en ligne de compte dans celle-ci, ou un sommaire de ceux-ci.   27(1) Where an offender is entitled by this Part or the regulations to make representations in relation to a decision to be taken by the Service about the offender, the person or body that is to take the decision shall, subject to subsection (3), give the offender, a reasonable period before the decision is to be taken, all the information to be considered in the taking of the decision or a summary of that information.   ... Cut-off level: the concentration of a drug in the urine that determines if the test will be considered positive or negative in accordance with Annexes B and C. ... [131]   Le paragraphe 31(1) du Règlement dispose : 31(1) Au cours de l’audition disciplinaire, la personne qui tient l’audition doit, dans des limites raisonnables, donner au détenu qui est accusé la possibilité : 31(1) The person who conducts a hearing of a disciplinary offence shall give the inmate who is charged a reasonable opportunity at the hearing to   a) d’interroger des témoins par l’intermédiaire de la personne qui tient l’audition, de présenter des éléments de preuve, d’appeler des témoins en sa faveur et d’examiner les pièces et les documents qui vont être pris en considération pour arriver à la décision;   (a) question witnesses through the person conducting the hearing, introduce evidence, call witnesses on the inmate’s behalf and examine exhibits and documents to be considered in the taking of the decision; and b) de présenter ses observations durant chaque phase de l’audition, y compris quant à la peine qui s’impose. ...