Search - considered

I state this because I would definitely have considered the Statement and referred to it in making my decision, if I had seen it.  The statement would have been considered because it might have changed the result in the Applicant’s favour.  ... Blackbourn has deposed that she would have considered and duly noted such a document had it been before her.  ...

The reasoning must be “sufficient and intelligible”, even if it is somewhat convoluted and if the decision must be considered as a whole; “a decision will be considered intelligible if the decision maker, considering all of the evidence in assessing the facts, develops a logical reasoning using the facts at issue”.  ...   A decision that does not involve any analysis of the evidence will be considered as being without reasons.  ...   ... Indeed, he recognized that the Minister was not required to give reasons for every “conceivable factor” and that the failure to state all of the reasons does not mean that they were not considered.   ...

Finally, an inability to pay  02      amounts owing may be considered to facilitate  03      collection of tax arrears.  04                            Mr. ... Canada 2005 FCA 153, a  18      decision of the Federal Court of Appeal.  19                            What that means is that the  20      Minister's decision must be supported by reasons  21      that can stand up to a probing judicial examination.   22      Those reasons need not be compelling, but they must  23      rationally support the conclusion reached.  24                            The Court cannot substitute  25      its own view for that of the Minister or his  26      delegates simply because the Court might have 0010  01      reached a different conclusion on the same facts.   02      By way of example, I must be satisfied that the  03      decisionmaker overlooked important evidence,  04      considered evidence that ought not to have been  05      considered, made material errors of fact, or made a  06      decision that cannot be rationally supported by the  07      reasons given for it.  08                            I accept as a correct  09      statement of the law on this issue the following  10      passage from Justice Frederick Gibson ' s decision in  11      Young v. ... Gray's ex post facto  25      assertion at paragraph 33 of his affidavit that this  26      new medical evidence is unpersuasive and would not 0012  01      have altered his decision.  02                            I have carefully considered  03      Mr. ...

ISSUES [15]            In my view the four issues that need to be considered in this application for judicial review are as set out below. ...     [33]            The Respondent argues that the Applicant’s perception cannot be considered in a vacuum.     The perception of the Applicant’s reasonableness must be considered in light of the CRA’s explanation as to why the FI04 position was staffed via competition ...

However, in view of the fact that three cases which were similar to the applicant’s case were being considered by the Tax Court, the parties agreed to hold the applicant’s appeal in abeyance ... The adequacy of reasons is to be considered as part of the assessment of the reasonableness of the decision under review. ...   [28]            Finally, the applicant complains that the respondent never contemplated the period as a whole, with the attendant consequence that periods of time were never considered for possible relief. ...

In a letter dated March 30, 2009, Mr Sailsman was notified by the CRA that he was considered a non-resident and could be subject to non-resident withholding tax on rental income received from a Canadian source. [4]                According to subsection 212(1) of the Income Tax Act every non-resident shall pay an income tax of 25% on every amount that a Canadian resident pays or credits to the non-resident.  ... Sailsman was entitled to expect that he would be given the opportunity to make representations in support of his request for late filing and that these representations would be considered by the CRA.  ... Sailsman was provided with the opportunity to state his case, his request for late filing was reconsidered on two occasions and his representations in support of such request were considered by the CRA at all stages of the treatment of the said request. ...

He also considered the cost of transforming the green tube. For the seamless casing imports, the cost of the green tube represented XX%, XX%, XX% respectively, of the total manufacturing cost of the finished product. ... He concluded that the Respondent’s seamless casing products did not fall under the product definition in the CITT injury findings on seamless casing from China. [23]            Finally, the Officer considered a past decision of the Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Directorate, which found that green tube purchased in China and processed in Indonesia would not be considered subject goods when imported into Canada. He considered the Statement of Reasons dated November 13, 1998, referred to by the Respondent in its request for the advanced ruling. ...

It is the legal validity and reasonableness of those two decisions made in January 2014 that are at issue today. [9]                In a first decision, the Acting Deputy Commissioner noted that the institutional head had applied the two corrective measures prescribed by the Senior Deputy Commissioner and that, all things considered, the matter of the applicant’s placement and maintenance in administrative segregation had become theoretical because two years had passed since that latter decision had been made. ... With regard to the applicant’s security reclassification, the Acting Deputy Commissioner found that all of the information in the applicant’s file and available at the time of the reassessment could and had been considered when administering the Security Reclassification Scale and the Assessment for Decision. She also considered the applicant’s adjustment difficulties, noted in his file, during his incarceration in the institutions mentioned above. ...

It considered both the evidence submitted to the ID and the evidence submitted in the appeal. ... The IAD also considered the fact that, over the years, especially when he worked in the Investigations Branch, teaching law, and as an administrator in the Ministry of Interior, Mr.  ... The IAD therefore considered all of the evidence before finding Mr. Bajraktari complicit. [32]            I will add that it is the IAD’s mandate to weigh the probative value of the evidence before it, and it is not for this Court to reweigh the evidence or to substitute its own opinion for that of the IAD (Torre v. ...

Appellant denied the claim for drawback and on an appeal from his decision to the Tariff Board only one question was considered, namely “whether or not the precipitators were ‘manufactured’ in Canada within the drawback items in issue”. ... In my view, this means only that “construction” was considered as the appropriate word to describe the process whereby furnaces and bridges are brought into existence, while “manufacture” was considered the appropriate word for precipitators. Any other view would result in precipitators of such size that they can be shipped whole being considered as manufactured objects and larger precipitators as not manufactured. ...