Search - considered

In the Supreme Court’s view, although the set-off approach in section 8 of the Guidelines may be a useful starting point for arriving at a reasonable solution taking into account the separate financial contribution of each parent, adjustments will be made to the set-off amount in light of the factors considered under paragraphs 9(b) and (c) of the Guidelines. ... (b) and (c) as equally important elements to determine the child support.   50    It should be noted here that the Table amounts are an estimate of the amount that is notionally being paid by the non‑custodial parent; where both parents are making an effective contribution, it is therefore necessary to verify how their actual contribution compares to the Table amount that is provided for each of them when considered payor parents. ... Section 18.1 of the Agreement specifically states that if a material change occurs in the condition, means, needs or other circumstances of either the husband or the wife, either the wife or the husband may apply for a variation of the child support (this refers to the third factor, set out in paragraph 9(c) of the Guidelines, to be considered in determining the child support amount) ...

Analysis   [10]          The definition of the expression “common-law partner” for the purposes of the Act is found in subsection 248(1) of the Act:   "common-law partner", with respect to a taxpayer at any time, means a person who cohabits at that time in a conjugal relationship with the taxpayer and   (a) has so cohabited with the taxpayer for a continuous period of at least one year, or   (b) would be the parent of a child of whom the taxpayer is a parent, if this Act were read without reference to paragraphs 252(1)(c) and (e) and subparagraph 252(2)(a)(iii),   and for the purposes of this definition, where at any time the taxpayer and the person cohabit in a conjugal relationship, they are, at any particular time after that time, deemed to be cohabiting in a conjugal relationship unless they were not cohabiting at the particular time for a period of at least 90 days that includes the particular time because of a breakdown of their conjugal relationship;   [11]          For the purposes of the CCTB and the NCBS, section 122.6 of the Act defines “cohabiting common-law spouse or common-law partner” as follows:   "cohabiting spouse or common-law partner" of an individual at any time means the person who at that time is the individual’s spouse or common-law partner and who is not at that time living separate and apart from the individual and, for the purpose of this definition, a person shall not be considered to be living separate and apart from an individual at any time unless they were living separate and apart at that time, because of a breakdown of their marriage or common-law partnership, for a period of at least 90 days that includes that time;   [12]          There is no doubt that the appellant considered herself to be Mr. ... The relevant points to be considered are as follows:   1.    Shelter          (a) Did the parties live under the same roof?        ... Jacob considered the appellant’s daughter to be his own daughter, given the length of the conjugal relationship with the appellant.   ...

  [29]     Counsel referred to paragraph 118(1) (d) which is another section which the Minister considered in determining whether or not this credit was available. ... Borden indicated he considered cutting Glen off, he never wavered from his position that Glen's position was the root of this most unfortunate situation in which the family found itself. ...     [46]     Those are all of the sections which the Minister considered and the sections which the Court went over just a few moments ago. ...

Town of Oliver et al. (2001), 206 D.L.R. (4th) 385 (S.C.C.) as authority for the proposition that land need not be vested in the Crown to be considered as reserve land. ... The Court of Appeal in that case ruled that, in order for the land to be considered reserve land under section 36, the Crown must have declared it to have been set apart for the use and benefit of band members. ...   [18]          From the cases considered above it can be seen that section 36 operates if land that was part of a reserve was expropriated for some limited purpose and that purpose has ended, or if the federal Crown has declared land to be set apart for the use and benefit of a band and for whatever reason title to that land is not specifically vested in the Crown ...

]   [11]     Further, in the preceding paragraphs, the Court considered two Ontario Court of Appeal decisions in which the “ingredient of compromise” was, according to the Ontario Rules, merely a factor to be considered rather than an essential element of a legitimate offer to settle. ... Moreover, in the further alternative, COA says that the words "unless otherwise ordered by the Court" in Rule 420 empower the Court to order something less than double costs.   6          The question whether an offer to settle must contain an element of compromise was considered by the Ontario Court of Appeal dealing with a somewhat analogous provision under the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure in the cases of Data General (Canada) Ltd. v. ... ]   [12]     It was against this backdrop that Lemieux, J. then considered the merits of the Canadian Olympic Association’s request for costs in excess of the tariff. ...

Had one reviewed the entire period with a view to arm's length versus non‑arm's length, this would not be considered reasonable and would, because of the ability to manipulate the remuneration based on concerns other than normal market forces, indicate a non‑arm's length arrangement ...   [22]          I agree with the Minister that if one were to review the entire period in light of the arm's length versus non‑arm's length issue, the remuneration would not be considered reasonable as it was based on concerns other than market forces and would indicate a non‑arm's length arrangement, but this is not what we are doing. ... With respect, I do not believe that either what transpired outside the period under appeal or the new arrangements agreed to between the Payor and the appellant should be considered in determining the nature and importance of the work during the period under appeal. ...

Issue and Analysis   [5]               The parties agree that the sole issue is whether superannuation must be considered as income from employment within the meaning of subparagraph 110(1)(f)(iv) of the Act ...   [15]          Moreover, in order for income to be considered as being from employment, it is no longer necessary that it be paid by the employer. ...   [28]          Moreover, under Part I of the Act, which is applicable to resident tax payers, superannuation benefits are considered as other sources of income pursuant to subparagraph 56(1)(a)(i) and not as income from an office or employment pursuant to subsection 5(1) and paragraph 6(1)(g) of the Act ...

I reproduce hereunder the provisions that are of importance in the present case, as applicable for the taxation year at issue:   56.(1) Amounts to be included in income for year- Without restricting the generality of section 3, there shall be included in computing the income of a taxpayer for a taxation year,   (h.1) Home Buyers’ Plan- amounts required by section 146.01 to be included in computing the taxpayer’s income for the year;     146(8) Benefits [and withdrawals] taxable- There shall be included in computing a taxpayer’s income for a taxation year the total of all amounts received by the taxpayer in the year as benefits out of or under registered retirement savings plans, other than excluded withdrawals (as defined in subsection 146.01(1) or 146.02(1)) of the taxpayer and amounts that are included under paragraph (12)(b) in computing the taxpayer’s income.     146.01(1) Definitions – In this section,   “ completion date”, in respect of an amount received by an individual, is   (a) where the amount was received before March 2, 1993, October 1, 1993,   (b) where the amount was received after March 1, 1993 and before March 2, 1994, October 1, 1994, and   (c) in any other case, October 1 of the calendar year following the calendar year in which the amount was received;   “designated withdrawal” of an individual is an amount received by the individual, as a benefit out of or under a registered retirement savings plan, pursuant to the individual’s written request in the prescribed form referred to in paragraph (a) of the definition "eligible amount" (as that definition read in its application to amounts received before 1999), paragraph (a) of the definition "regular eligible amount" or paragraph (a) of the definition "supplemental eligible amount";   “eligible amount” of an individual is a regular eligible amount or supplemental eligible amount of the individual;   “excluded withdrawal” of an individual means   (a) an eligible amount received by the individual,   “qualifying home” means   (a) a housing unit located in Canada, or   (b) a share of the capital stock of a cooperative housing corporation, the holder of which is entitled to possession of a housing unit located in Canada,   except that, where the context so requires, a reference to a qualifying home that is a share described in paragraph (b) means the housing unit to which the share described in that paragraph relates;   “regular eligible amount” of an individual means an amount received at a particular time by the individual as a benefit out of or under a registered retirement savings plan if   (a) the amount is received pursuant to the individual’s written request in a prescribed form in which the individual sets out the location of a qualifying home that the individual has begun, or intends not later than one year after its acquisition by the individual to begin, using as a principal place of residence,   (b) the individual entered into an agreement in writing before the particular time for the acquisition of it or with respect to its construction,   (c) the individual   (i) acquires the qualifying home (or a replacement property for the qualifying home) before the completion date in respect of the amount, or   (ii) dies before the end of the calendar year that includes the completion date in respect of the amount,   (d) neither the individual nor the individual’s spouse or common-law partner acquired the qualifying home more than 30 days before the particular time,   (e) the individual did not have an owner-occupied home in the period   (i) that began at the beginning of the fourth preceding calendar year that ended before the particular time, and   (ii) that ended on the 31st day before the particular time, (f) the individual’s spouse or common-law partner did not, in the period referred to in paragraph (e), have an owner-occupied home   (i) that was inhabited by the individual during the spouse’s or common-law partner’s marriage or common-law partnership to the individual, or   (ii) that was a share of the capital stock of a cooperative housing corporation that relates to a housing unit inhabited by the individual during the spouse’s or common-law partner’s marriage or common-law partnership to the individual,   (g) the individual   (i) acquired the qualifying home before the particular time and is resident in Canada at the particular time, or   (ii) is resident in Canada throughout the period that begins at the particular time and ends at the earlier of the time of the individual’s death and the earliest time at which the individual acquires the qualifying home or a replacement property for it,   (h) the total of the amount and all other eligible amounts received by the individual in the calendar year that includes the particular time does not exceed $20,000, and   (i) the individual’s HBP balance at the beginning of the calendar year that includes the particular time is nil;   (2)  Special rules- For the purposes of this section,   (a) an individual shall be considered to have acquired a qualifying home if the individual acquired it jointly with one or more other persons; (a.1) an individual shall be considered to have an owner-occupied home at any time where, at that time, the individual owns, whether jointly with another person or otherwise, a housing unit or a share of the capital stock of a cooperative housing corporation and   (i)                   the housing unit is inhabited by the individual as the individual’s principal place of residence at that time, or   (ii) the share was acquired for the purpose of acquiring a right to possess a housing unit owned by the corporation and that unit is inhabited by the individual as the individual’s principal place of residence at that time;   (b) where an individual agrees to acquire a condominium unit, the individual shall be deemed to have acquired it on the day the individual is entitled to immediate vacant possession of it;   (c) except for the purposes of subparagraph (g)(ii) of the definition "regular eligible amount" and subparagraph (f)(ii) of the definition "supplemental eligible amount", an individual or a specified disabled person in respect of the individual is deemed to have acquired, before the completion date in respect of a designated withdrawal received by the individual, the qualifying home in respect of which the designated withdrawal was received if   (i) neither the qualifying home nor a replacement property for it was acquired by the individual or the specified disabled person before that completion date, and   (ii) either   (A) the individual or the specified disabled person   (I)                  is obliged under the terms of a written agreement in effect on that completion date to acquire the qualifying home (or a replacement property for it) on or after that date, and   (II)               acquires the qualifying home or a replacement property for it before the day that is one year after that completion date, or   (B) the individual or the specified disabled person made payments, the total of which equalled or exceeded the total of all designated withdrawals that were received by the individual in respect of the qualifying home,   (I)                  to persons with whom the individual was dealing at arm’s length,   (II)               in respect of the construction of the qualifying home or a replacement property for it, and   (III)             in the period that begins at the time the individual first received a designated withdrawal in respect of the qualifying home and that ends before that completion date; and   (d) an amount received by an individual in a particular calendar year is deemed to have been received by the individual at the end of the preceding calendar year and not at any other time if   (i) the amount is received in January of the particular year (or at such later time as is acceptable to the Minister),   (ii) the amount would not be an eligible amount if this section were read without reference to this paragraph, and   (iii) the amount would be an eligible amount if the definition "regular eligible amount" in subsection (1) were read without reference to paragraph (i) of that definition and the definition "supplemental eligible amount" were read without reference to paragraph (h) of that definition ...   [7]               Counsel for the respondent’s argument is that the appellant did not comply with all the conditions required in order for the $20,000 withdrawal to be considered a regular eligible amount. ...   [23]          According to counsel, the date of acquisition cannot be considered to occur after the completion date in the former case and before the completion date in the latter case. ...

In the end, I took and applied those factors from each of the expert reports that I considered to be the most appropriate and reasonable under the circumstances. ... A lump sum award may be considered where solicitor-client costs are not warranted but the Tariff will not be sufficient (subsection 147(4) of the Rules). ...   …   …I have considered the criteria enumerated in the Rule and have concluded that a lump sum award is not warranted. ...

Thus, where the nature of a taxpayer's venture contains elements which suggest that it could be considered a hobby or other personal pursuit, but the venture is undertaken in a sufficiently commercial manner, the venture will be considered a source of income for the purposes of the Act.   53        We emphasize that this “pursuit of profit” source test will only require analysis in situations where there is some personal or hobby element to the activity in question. ... We would also emphasize that although the reasonable expectation of profit is a factor to be considered at this stage, it is not the only factor, nor is it conclusive.   ... Thus, even though the taxpayer has a personal interest in the activity, if “the venture is undertaken in a sufficiently commercial manner, the venture will be considered a source of income for the purposes of the Act”: Stewart at para 52. ...