Search - considered

Although Cattanach J. expressed the caution that his words did not constitute an “exact” definition, the extent to which his words have been adopted in the jurisprudence without change over some thirty years suggests that his approach, although not necessarily exhaustive, is now considered to be the working definition. ... The legislative restrictions are relevant and have to be considered. In this case, the Appellant’s expert opined and counsel argued that this extent of regulation automatically dismissed the market as a relevant market and required a proxy market be created. ... These reasons and this decision should not be considered to suggest otherwise or raise concerns that fundraising activities by charities should be in any way curtailed. ...

Justice Visser in 2078970 Ontario Inc. [8] agreed with Paletta and stated that while earlier cases dealing with previous versions of Rule 58 may still be of assistance, they should be considered cautiously and distinguished when needed. [17]   Cases still suggest some caution. ... Moreover, inadmissible evidence did not warrant, in Judge Gouge’s considered opinion, the exercise of a discretion to stay proceedings. ... Questions 1, 2 and 3, which fall with the category of mixed questions of law or fact or the admissibility of evidence, shall be considered further. ...

In addition, he never considered himself an employee of the Payer. Although he acknowledged that the Payer paid him as an employee, he stated that “they shouldn’t have done that” as it was a breach of the Offer of Admission. ... If religious beliefs (or the absence thereof), were to be considered relevant to bolstering a witness’ credibility, then surely they would also be relevant to impeaching credibility. ... Rooke’s payments were paid by the Payer’s payroll department, suggesting that the Payer considered Mr. ...

The Appellant further submits that the transfer pricing income adjustments for years subsequent to 2006 should also be considered. The Respondent acknowledges that the amounts in issue in the years under appeal were substantial but that since the result of the Appeals did not bind future years the amounts reassessed in those years should not be considered. [15]   I find that the amounts in issue for the years under appeal were substantial and that this factor favours an appropriate award of costs to the Appellant. ... Conclusion [45]   I have carefully considered each of the factors described above and I have concluded that an award to the Appellant of a lump sum in lieu of taxed costs for counsel fees is appropriate in the circumstances. ...

This amount was considered sufficient to pay the secured creditors, including the CRA, which had a claim of $74,000. [25]   During his testimony, the appellant also criticized the CRA for failing to file a request for payment for any amount it was owed in a timely manner to the trustee in the proposal and the trustee in the bankruptcy of Gestion RER Inc., RER Hydro Ltd. and Hydroliennes TRÉC Saint-Laurent Inc., when the companies had the funds required to pay all preferred claims. [26]   Stephen Thibault, collections officer for the CRA, testified at the hearing to explain that the CRA had filed its claims in a timely manner with the trustee in the proposal and the trustee in the bankruptcy. ... These circumstances must be taken into account, but must be considered against an objective "reasonably prudent person" standard in which context a given decision was made (paragraph 39); (e) the objective of the review of the defence provided under subsection 227.1(3) of the Act is to require that the director's duty of care, diligence and skill be exercised to prevent failures to remit. ... The amount obtained was sufficient to pay the full amount of the CRA's claim, and it was only because of a technicality in the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act that the CRA's claim could not be paid in full (part of the CRA's claim was not considered a claim of property belonging to the Receiver General of Canada). [48]   As indicated in management's report to the creditors concerning the proposal, the appellant and his spouse invested over $4 million of their own money to continue Groupe RER's activities and prevent its bankruptcy. ...

Therefore, the location of the employee's principal residence was not considered in determining the allowance.   We submit that an allowance cannot be in respect of transportation between the appellant's principal place of residence and a special work site if the principal place of residence is not even considered in determining the allowance. ... Respondent counsel noted that this argument has not been previously considered by this Court. [24]   Counsel referred to decisions of this Court where the allowance was determined using the principal place of residence. ...

Relevance also could be established where the refused documents had been prepared in the context of the audit of the current taxpayer or had been considered by officials involved in the audit (para. 8, Superior). [11]   In Superior Plus Corp. v. ... Her Majesty 2019 TCC 112 (general procedure), per my colleague Visser J., wherein a motion to compel was considered in the context of a GAAR issue similar to that in this present motion. ... It is well established that a degree of judicial deference, again however slight, can be accorded statements of the Minister as to interpretation of fiscal legislation that are published in tax interpretation bulletins and information circulars. [16]   So, seeking to show from other CRA or related documentation (whether or not a copy happens to have been lodged in CRA's audit or objection files of the particular taxpayer, or otherwise considered by CRA in respect of the particular taxpayer) that the Minister's pleaded policy for subsection 245(4) purposes does not wholly conform with other administrative fiscal statements on the same subject should be acceptable, at least at the discovery stage. ...

I do agree that the transaction to be considered is that between Enns and John Deere, which produces the one per cent holdback, not the transaction between Enns and the customer which produces the original amounts. ... This judgment is based on the Court's acceptance of the assertion of counsel for the respondent at the hearing, that the transaction to be considered by the Court is that of the agreement between Enns and John Deere, not Enns and a customer. ... In the same way, it has not been shown that even if the above method of dealing with these amounts could be considered as setting up some kind of a reserve (a position not taken by the appellant, but raised by the respondent) that such a reserve has a viable basis in the Act. ...

That evidence is necessary in order to prove whether the losses she suffered during the years in question are deductible or, on the contrary, must be considered to have been personal or living expenses. ... The dedication the taxpayer has to making the farm profitable must also be considered. ... All things considered, these activities generated neither profits nor even gross income during the three years in question. ...

The Appellant went by the lot a couple of times but did nothing else to develop it, except that she considered what type of house she would put upon it. ... It is only a matter of what weight you give to the later transactions, considered important to the Respondent’s position, that there were a series of transactions relative to the subject property. ... Each case must be considered after all the facts are ascertained, here they were. ...