Search - considered

  [5]                The factors to be considered in deciding whether to extend the period for filing a notice of appeal are set out in Pharmascience Inc. v. ... The factors to be considered are conveniently summarized in Karon Resources Inc. v. ...

Having considered the notice of appeal and the other materials that were provided to the Court, in my view, this concession is warranted. ... In so concluding, I am expressing no opinion as to the outcome of any of the issues that will be considered in the appeal in file A-385-08.   ...

Canada (Minister of Employment & Immigration), [1985] 2 F.C. 263 (F.C.A.) should be considered. ... We are unable to say that he was wrong to accept that explanation. [6]                Having considered all of the other submissions made by counsel for the appellant, we are not persuaded that there is any ground for interfering with the Judge's decision to grant the Crown additional time for filing its Reply. [7]                This appeal will be dismissed with costs. ...

The factors to be considered in determining whether to grant leave to intervene are set out in Canadian Union of Public Employees (Airline Division) v. ... In this Court, that has never been considered a sufficient ground to permit an intervention. [10]            On balance, I am not satisfied that the intervention of the Institute will assist the determination of the appeal. ...

In our view, when the record is considered as a whole, there was a more than adequate factual basis to support the Judge's conclusion. That some of the facts considered by the Judge may have favoured BCH's characterization of the relationship is not sufficient to warrant our intervention on an application for judicial review. ...

In our view, when the record is considered as a whole, there was a more than adequate factual basis to support the Judge's conclusion. That some of the facts considered by the Judge may have favoured BCH's characterization of the relationship is not sufficient to warrant our intervention on an application for judicial review. ...

("GTS"). [3]                In order to determine whether the taxpayers were "associated" with GTS, the Judge was called upon to consider the definition in subsection 256(1), which provides that "a corporation is associated with another in a taxation year" if "(a) one of the corporations controlled, directly or indirectly, in any manner whatever, the other". [4]                This provision is itself further defined by subsection 256(5.1), which states that, where the Act uses the expression "controlled, directly or indirectly, in any manner whatever", a corporation shall be considered to be so controlled by another corporation at any time when "the controller has any direct or indirect influence that, if exercised, would result in control in fact of the corporation". [5]                The Judge found that the taxpayers were not "controlled" by GTS for the purpose of subsection 256(5.1). ... We may only consider whether the Judge overlooked relevant facts or took irrelevant facts into account, and whether there were any facts rationally capable of supporting his conclusion. [11]            We are not persuaded that the Judge overlooked or misapprehended the relevant facts, or that, when the facts are considered as a whole, his finding that GTS did not control the taxpayers is so clearly wrong as to constitute palpable or overriding error. [12]            In view of our conclusion on the issue of control, it is not necessary that we express an opinion on whether the taxpayers would have come within the franchise exception if they had been controlled by GTS, and we decline to do so. [13]            For these reasons, the appeals will be dismissed with costs. ...

The overriding consideration is whether it is in the interests of justice that the extension of time be granted. [4]   The appellant asserts that the Federal Court erred in failing to consider the fact that the respondent’s election appeal and subsequent application for judicial review seek to have a Chief, whose eligibility and integrity have not been questioned, removed from office on the basis of allegations that the fourth place candidate was ineligible for election and had engaged in corrupt practices. [5]   It is true that while the Court stated that it had considered all of the material adduced by the parties, it did not make specific reference to this argument in its order. ... According to the appellant, the Court should have determined whether the respondent’s case had a “reasonable chance of success”. [7]   The Federal Court expressly stated that it had considered the four Hennelly factors in coming to its decision in this case, which would necessarily have included an evaluation of the strength of the respondent’s case. ...

Williams to conduct a fishing expedition. [4]   In dismissing the rule 51 appeal, the Federal Court judge carefully considered all of the ten issues identified by Mr. ... Encana Corporation, 2017 FCA 37 at para. 12, leave to appeal refused, [2017] 2 S.C.R. x, In a case such as the present one where each level of decision-maker is in agreement as to the outcome, this Court must look to the Prothonotary’s decision to determine whether the Federal Court judge erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in refusing to intervene. [6]   Having reviewed the prothonotary’s decision and the reasons of the Federal Court judge and considered the parties’ submissions, we can see no error of law or palpable and overriding error on the part of the Federal Court judge in refusing to intervene. ...

And in Housen at para. 46, we are instructed to presume, absent evidence to the contrary, that the Tax Court considered the evidence before it. [8]   In the end, we conclude that the Tax Court did not commit any palpable and overriding error. In particular, at paras. 12, 25-29 and 33 of its reasons, it considered the conflicting evidence, addressed the conflict in its reasons, and made findings of fact free from palpable and overriding error. ...