Search - considered

Given this obligation, it is difficult to see how a taxpayer’s ignorance about the fact that RRSP contributions are subject to a limit could be considered reasonable. ... As the respondent noted, each taxpayer’s circumstances must be considered objectively (Connolly, at para 69) and it appears that CRA did so. ... The letter showed that CRA considered the applicant’s circumstances and her position on why her tax liability should be waived. [54] CRA’s letter recognized that the applicant did not intend to make excess contributions. ...

Specific findings made in the detailed and carefully considered reasons for judgment of Justice MacKay were: i.           ... No. 4352, Sedgwick J. of the Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) considered the purpose of the equivalent provision of the Ontario Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. ... FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED [51]            As for the factors to be considered when an application is brought pursuant to subsection 40(1) of the Act, in Vojic v. ...

The Minister must be able to seriously find that the person is considered a potential risk. ... Thus, a blanket statement that the agency has considered all the evidence will not suffice when the evidence omitted from any discussion in the reasons appears squarely to contradict the agency's finding of fact. ... Makomena can seriously be considered to be a potential re-offender. At the very least, the Minister’s delegate had a duty to consider the evidence provided by the expert. ...

I have not considered the affidavits filed by Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario (HMQ Ontario) and the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD), and the plaintiff in his responding motion record when considering whether the Claim should be struck. I have, however, considered this evidence when determining if leave to amend should be granted. ... Only when a court or tribunal possesses all three attributes is it considered a “court of competent jurisdiction” for the purpose of ordering Charter relief (R v 974649 Ontario Inc, [2001] 3 S.C.R. 575 at para 15). ...

She considered the evidence before her, including the Bank’s Narrative and Worked Example. ... BMO states that the Minister should not have considered its ultimate Recovery Rate at the approval stage as it is premature. ... The outcome of her analysis was reasonable when considered against the principle of a revenue-based output method. ...

MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION   MOTION IN WRITING CONSIDERED AT ST. ...

On appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal, Justice Rothstein dismissed the Minister’s appeal and affirmed the following language of the Federal Court (Thanabalasingham, above at para 21): [The ID] could have described in more detail his reasoning, but his failure to do so does not constitute a reviewable error when it is clear from the decision itself that he had considered all the evidence relating to the context of those convictions and, nevertheless, declared himself not satisfied that they alone could support a detention order. ... [30]   The Minister argues that the Member unreasonably determined that the Respondent was rehabilitated, for the following reasons: (i) The Member should not have given weight to the fact that the Respondent has no criminal convictions since entering prison in January 2014, as his institutional convictions during that period suggest he is not rehabilitated; (ii) The Member’s finding of rehabilitation is inconsistent with the evidence from Corrections Canada linking the Respondent to the institutional subculture, in particular a 2018 report by the Respondent’s parole officer; (iii) The Member unreasonably considered the presence of the Respondent’s children when addressing rehabilitation. [31]   The Minister mischaracterizes the Member’s finding. ... The ID considered this evidence in depth and reasonably weighed it. The Minister invites this Court to intervene and reweigh the evidence that was before the Member, but that is not the role of this Court (Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v Khosa, 2009 SCC 12 at para 61). [33]   The ID was also reasonable to note that the presence of the Respondent’s young children present a motivation for him not to reoffend. [34]   The Member reasonably found that the Respondent was on a path towards rehabilitation, having reviewed in detail the Respondent’s circumstances. ...

There were a number of incidents that you were involved in that were concerning and could be considered breaches of the RCMP Code of Conduct. ... I considered this to be relevant to the global assessment of your suitability to remain a member. ... When this information is considered in its totality, I am left to conclude, on the balance of probabilities, based on the documentation provided that you have failed to consistently demonstrate your suitability to remain as a member of the RCMP despite being provided the reasonable opportunity, support, guidance, and direction to do so. ...

Where a statement of claim appears to exhibit defects of this nature, it is entirely reasonable for a case management judge to direct that a motion to strike be considered first. ... She considered the relevant case law, in particular Simon v Canada, 2011 FCA 6, and correctly stated that the test is whether “the defects in the claim can potentially be cured by amendment.” ... DONALD WILSON, LAURA LEE, AMY FORCE, PAT CHMILAR, JENNIFER YOUNG, DAMEN GREWAL, JULISA CHENG, AL MIYAI, MEGAN KOWALCHUK, EVA GOLDSTEIN, CHARMAINE MARTIN, JONATHAN LEE, WILLIAM JAMES, GEORGE BODY, JOHN DOE 1, JANE DOE 1, JOHN DOE 2, JANE DOE 2, JOHN DOE 3, JANE DOE 3 MOTION MADE IN WRITING PURSUANT TO RULE 369 OF THE FEDERAL COURTS RULES CONSIDERED AT OTTAWA, ONTARIO. order AND REASONS: GRAMMOND J. ...

Canadian Liberty Net. [7] In that case the Court considered the interpretation to be given to the second test in ITO-International Terminal Operators Ltd. and said the following: The requirement that there be valid federal law which nourishes the statutory grant of jurisdiction serves primarily to ensure that federal courts are kept within their constitutionally mandated sphere. ... Rouleau J. declined jurisdiction on the following grounds: The contractual issue [the validity of the transactions] therefore cannot be considered to be in some way incidental to the Court's jurisdiction nor is it merely a phase of compulsory execution... nor the Federal Court Rules, which grant jurisdiction to issue a final garnishment order, can in any way seem to bestow or nourish jurisdiction on this Court to undertake an examination of the circumstances surrounding the transactions and agreements in question and to make a determination with respect to the Crown's allegations of fraud, allegations which concern incidents that occurred some 8 months prior to this event. [9] [38]       Further, there is no doubt that the questions of fraud, simulation and enforceability cannot be fairly and properly resolved on the basis solely of evidence by affidavit and the transcripts of examinations on affidavit. [39]       In order to render a decision based on these grounds, and in which the oral evidence is important, the Court must have the opportunity of assessing the credibility of witnesses. ...