Search - considered

Submissions Of Counsel For The Appellant – Main Issue: [7] Counsel for the Appellant points out that the bone of contention with the Respondent relates to whether the certificate which merely states that the student in question has completed the program can be considered as attesting to the competence of the student to practice or perform his or her trade or vocation, namely, acting. [8] To quote from counsel's written submissions: 20. ... Analysis And Decision: [12] Part III of Schedule V of the Act provides for various services which are considered as exempt supplies. ...

The following criteria should be considered: the profit and loss experience in past years, the taxpayer's training, the taxpayer's intended course of action, the capability of the venture as capitalized to show a profit after charging capital cost allowance. ... There was no evidence that rental vacancy rates were considered. [18]          Last, the representative's "rental loss adjustments" relied upon to support the Appellants' position vis à vis potential profitability are arithmetically inaccurate and rely on assumptions which are not supported by the evidence. ...

" She considered the Centre's employees to include the receptionist, typist, lab technicians, nurses, clerical staff, office manager and janitors, not the locums. ... The Court considered the terms and conditions of the contract itself which contained numerous provisions that were similar to those that other employees of the government of Alberta enjoyed, including holiday provisions, entitlement to sick leave days, restrictions and ability to conduct a private practice, provisions for the deduction of income tax at source, payments of sustenance and travelling allowance and payment of fixed remuneration per month. [33]          In the case at bar, unlike Mirchandani, supra, one third of all fees billed by the Workers was used by the clinic to pay expenses of the clinic. ...

At this point, I might add that the Appellant had previously claimed rental losses with respect to the condominium from 1990 to 1996 and that the losses were also disallowed for 1995 and 1996. [4]            The Appellant, who is a research scientist working for the National Research Council in Boucherville, Quebec, claimed to have always been interested in various investments such as stocks, bonds, mutual funds and real estate. [5]            In 1990, he was looking for a long-term investment and after having evaluated the potential of other condominiums, he decided to invest in Les Tours du Parc, as he considered the project's potential for appreciation in value to be high. ... The following criteria should be considered: the profit and loss experience in past years, the taxpayer's training, the taxpayer's intended course of action, the capability of the venture as capitalized to show a profit after charging capital cost allowance. ...

The Queen, 99 DTC 194, and stated at page 198: [20] The concept of unjust enrichment was considered by the Supreme Court of Canada in Pettkus v. ... Becker, the Court considered the services provided by Ms. Becker and fashioned the remedy of constructive trust. ...

The number of children is not a factor considered in establishing the resource envelope. ... I believe this is how this clause must be interpreted because, in order for it to be considered as being broad enough in scope to amend, as it were, the definition of "recipient", it would have to be contained in a paragraph dealing specifically with the definition of "recipient", not in the paragraph concerning cases in which no consideration is payable in respect of the supply. ...

., [1962] S.C.R. 109 and other Supreme Court cases referred therein). [26] Although the 1991 expenditures referred to above were ultimately considered to be in the nature of repairs and thus treated as current expenses by Revenue Canada, it is my opinion that the 1992 expenditures with respect to the basement of Property #1 cannot receive such treatment. ... While pointing the mortar joints in the stone walls could perhaps be considered to be in the nature of a repair, the balance of the work is clearly an addition. ...

The Queen, 96 DTC 1025. [15] In determining whether the partnership, considered as a notional separate person, is engaged in an adventure in the nature of trade, one must look at what the partnership actually does and at what the motives and intentions of the persons who in fact run the partnership are. ... In particular the prospectus for the Queen Street partnership contains a number of statements such as: The investment should be considered only by investors who are able to make a long-term investment.... ...

The husband agrees to pay 50% of the costs of any procedure or device medically required by the children and not covered by insurance (e.g. orthodontia), provided that the procedure or device is agreed to by both parties, and is not for purely cosmetic purposes. [4] The Appellant considered that paragraph 9 was a very important part of the agreement. ... It would serve no purpose to be unduly legalistic in interpreting either the appropriate sections of the Act nor cases which have considered it. ...

Paragraph 18(1)(a) sets out a general prohibition denying a deduction unless the amount is paid or incurred for the purpose of gaining or producing income while paragraph 18(1)(h) limits the deductibility of personal and living expenses which are defined in subsection 248(1) as follows: “personal or living expenses” includes (a) the expenses of properties maintained by any person for the use or benefit of the taxpayer or any person connected with the taxpayer by blood relationship, marriage or adoption, and not maintained in connection with a business carried on for profit or with a reasonable expectation of profit, [Emphasis added] (b)... [10] Even if one were to assume that the Orders made by the Ontario Court in the Appellant's matrimonial proceedings gave him the right to recover portions of certain support payments made to his former spouse and that this right constituted "property" for the purposes of the Act, the amounts, if and when recovered, cannot logically be considered to be income, i.e. profit from that "property". ... Traditionally, expenses that simply make the taxpayer available to the business are not considered business expenses since the taxpayer is expected to be available to the business as a quid pro quo for business income received. ...