Search - considered

By registered letter dated April 6, 1973, Mr Kassirer of the firm Spencer, Romberg, Kassirer, Barkin & Esbin, acting on behalf of Mr Liebeck, advised the appelant that his share of the balance was $97,475 and unless the amount was received by April 10, 1973, the appellant would be considered as being no longer interested in the project and Mr Liebeck and Mr Huning would complete the transaction without the appellant (Tab 4). ... It appears from the correspondence that the appellant was considered by Messrs Liebeck and Huning as reluctant in paying his share of the purchase price and they were indeed anxious to exclude the appellant from the transaction. ...

Since the Income Tax Act does contain a definition of the word “child” (subsection 252(1) specifies certain persons to be a child of the taxpayer, but does not deal with the definition of a child), the word must be considered to take its ordinary meaning. ... As a general rule a word is to be considered as used throughout a statute in the same sense. ...

—There is some evidence that legal action was considered or commenced by the appellant against Holdings. ... I have already expressed the view that on the basis of the evidence available to the Board, a claim against Holdings for damages arising out of the termination of the contract, or in lieu of proper notice, might well have been considered by the appellant. ...

In claiming that the loss he sustained ought to be considered a loss from an employment or business under the Income Tax Act on the ground that the transaction had been ‘‘an adventure or concern in the nature of trade” (subsection 248(1)), not only is the defendant trying to disprove facts regularly assumed by the Minister when making the assessment* [2] but his contention goes against what can be accepted as being “normal” and readily believable. ... It is well settled that, under exceptional and unusual circumstances, an isolated venture can be considered as a business and the acquisition of shares in a company may be a trading operation!. ...

Tracts of land, such as the Coglin farm, were purchased from time to time in advance of immediate requirements in an area considered Suitable for residential expansion. ... The search for a purchase of such land is only one factor to be considered in determining the owner’s position re taxation. ...

The statute-barred years for reassessment were 1967, 1968 and 1969 and accordingly counsel for the respondent led evidence in the first instance to determine whether the reassessment for the said years ought to be permitted and considered by the Board. ... Accordingly I rule on the evidence that the respondent has discharged the onus herein and was entitled to go beyond the statutory limitation period and the assessment ought to be considered. ...

The respondent objects to the procedure; however, his objections all appear to have been considered and rejected by my brother Gibson in Royal American Shows, Inc v MNR, [1976] 1 FC 269; [1975] CTC 557, and I cannot now consider them to be well founded. ... The facts of this case are not materially different from those considered by the Federal Court of Appeal in a judgment rendered earlier this week.* [1] There the documents seized under paragraph 231(1)(d) were taken from the possession of the Edmonton City Police, having been seized by them in the execution of search warrants obtained in respect of an alleged conspiracy to defraud. ...

On first reading subsection 3 of section 231 one would envisage this section as one that could be considered as strict liability. ... This was again considered by Justice Henderson in the case of R v Saltron Television Ltd, which came by way of stated case from a decision of His Honour W J Tuchtie. ...

It is in this light that the present motion to strike must be considered. ... It is true that plaintiff in these paragraphs describes himself as an executive and states that he has prospected and explored properties for petroleum, natural gas and minerals and has developed same and that he at all times considered himself an investor. ...

Wilson himself gave evidence that he had received his shares in Diplomat in about 1961, had paid only a nominal sum for them, considered himself an equal “partner” with Norman Fitchett in the operation of Diplomat, had been receiving a salary of about $10,000 in 1971 and was aware that the balance of the shares in Diplomat belonged to the Fitchetts (although he was uncertain if this meant Norman, May, or Stamay). ... He had never urged Fitchett to accept such an offer, he was not an officer or director of Diplomat, considered that the profit-sharing arrangement referred to in Exhibit A-2 dealt with that already earned by him during 1971, and stated that he had made his arrangements for sale of his stock before agreeing with Fitchett to remain on as an employee after such sale. ...