Search - considered

Furthermore, the IAD also considered the best interests of the other two children (see for instance, paragraphs 35 and 37-39 of the Decision). [13]   All factors in the H&C analysis were found to be positive. ...

This is followed up by expression of concerns about kidnapping of the children in both his wife’s and sister-in-law’s letters, while no mention of which was made in the BOC. [13]   In his Basis of Claim (BOC), he stated with (my emphasis) that “ unknown person s have been to my in-laws’ homes to look for me” and that she would state that “my wife and children were living in the home to take care of her because she was not well”. [14]   Finally, the panel Member noted that there was no evidence in any of the documents for the Applicant’s testimony where the alleged attackers on September 9, 2016 were part of any group that was mentioned by the Applicant, who indicated he did not know who the assailants were. [15]   The panel Member ultimately concluded that there was no credible or reliable evidence that anyone had been seeking the Applicant since the one incident September 2016 and that on the balance of probabilities no one would be seeking him out if returned to Pakistan. [16]   The panel Member also considered the alternative conclusion that Islamabad was a reasonable internal flight alternative (IFA). ...

See, for example, Malaba v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 FC 84 at paragraph 11; Ntatoulou v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 173 at paragraph 14. [16]   In this case, the RPD’s brief reasons do not allow me to determine whether in fact it considered all of the explanations given by Mr. ...

The record reveals the Officer considered the Applicant’s circumstances fully, relying on current country information and the absence of facts to support the Applicant’s claims. [21]   The Officer’s decision was justifiable, transparent, and intelligible, falling within a range of outcomes defensible in respect of the facts and law. ...

[emphasis added] [18]   In approving the Settlement Agreement, Madam Justice Kane considered the fact that the Settlement Agreement would not provide for interest and stated in her Order and Reasons dated January 29, 2019: [48]   Class Members will not receive interest. ...

In Gill, the Court considered a non-exhaustive list of five factors to determine if a person is a bona fide student. ...

In fact, on the face of the decision, it is impossible to discern what part or parts of the Applicant’s evidence were insufficient. [17]   Although the Respondent urges an interpretation of the Officer’s decision which assumes all of the Applicant’s evidence was considered, in this case that is not possible.   ...

However, he determined that there was no basis to reverse the inadmissibility finding. [7]   The Delegate said that H&C factors were considered, including the interests of the Applicant’s children, his prior establishment in Canada, the physical and emotional challenges faced by his wife, as well as the family’s financial difficulties. [8]   The Applicant raises three main arguments. ...

However, his claim focuses on the taxes that were not deducted at source, as well as the contributions to the Quebec Pension Plan. [7]   The origin of the issue for the applicant is that Latulippe considered him to be self-employed and that the employer was not obliged to deduct amounts at source from amounts paid to a self-employed person. ...

I therefore considered whether this is an appropriate instance in which costs ought to be awarded against Vancouver City Savings Credit Union, who is not a party. ...