Search - considered

Well, it was originally based on the amount of money at risk that each investor had made, or had invested, and that was considered as close an approximation to the contribution to the profit of the company as anyone could figure out. ... This situation is on all fours with that considered by the Federal Court-Trial Division in the case of The Queen v. ... On this aspect, the present appeals are therefore clearly distinguishable from the case considered by Christie, A.C.J. of this Court in the matter of Samuel F. ...

The first was that to the extent the outlay is considered to be a capital outlay it was, as characterized by the respondent, a cost of refinancing the first promissory note and therefore the amount is deductible pursuant to paragraph 20(1)(e) of the Act. ... Ives and the appellants should be precluded from arguing the issue, even if that argument was not advanced at trial or considered by the courts. ... For the $1,250,000 to be considered an expenditure on revenue account would fly in the face of common sense. ...

The Appellant never considered that it had any ownership in the tips and gratuities because they belonged to the entire team. ... In any event, as Respondent counsel correctly noted, the test is not “who the tips and gratuities belong to” but, instead, the test is “who paid them”. [54]         In concluding that it was the Appellant that paid the gratuities, the issue is resolved in respect to the CPP provisions, with the result that the tips and gratuities will be considered pensionable earnings. ... The decision in Lake City, at paragraphs 57 to 61, considered these amendments and concluded that the provisions meant that Parliament had deferred jurisdiction over the social assistance net in respect to CPP and EI to the provinces. ...

He stated: 43. . . the law will impute knowledge to a taxpayer who, in circumstances that dictate or strongly suggest that an inquiry should be made with respect to his or her tax situation, refuses or fails to commence such an inquiry without proper justification. [24]         It has been held that in drawing the line between “ordinary” negligence or neglect and “gross” negligence, a number of factors have to be considered: (a)     the magnitude of the omission in relation to the income declared, (b)     the opportunity the taxpayer had to detect the error, (c)      the taxpayer’s education and apparent intelligence, (d)     genuine effort to comply. ... This may not be a major point, but when considered cumulatively with all the other red flags, it should have aroused suspicion in his mind. ... This strange request, although not a strong factor, should have aroused the Appellant’s suspicions when considered together with all the other factors. ...

He stated: 43. . . the law will impute knowledge to a taxpayer who, in circumstances that dictate or strongly suggest that an inquiry should be made with respect to his or her tax situation, refuses or fails to commence such an inquiry without proper justification. [27]         It has been held that in drawing the line between “ordinary” negligence or neglect and “gross” negligence, a number of factors have to be considered: (a)     the magnitude of the omission in relation to the income declared, (b)     the opportunity the taxpayer had to detect the error, (c)      the taxpayer’s education and apparent intelligence, (d)     genuine effort to comply. ... This may not be a major point, but when considered cumulatively with all the other red flags, it should have aroused suspicion in his mind.  ... This strange request, although not a strong factor, should have aroused the Appellant’s suspicions when considered together with all the other factors. ...

It has been decided that this employment was not insurable for the following reasons: you were not employed under a contract of service; alternatively, if you were considered to have been employed under a contract of service, your employment was excepted from insurable employment because you were not dealing at arm’s length nor were you deemed to have been dealing at arm’s length with London Paving Bros. ... R-3 tab 14) The appeals to this Court followed. [21] The principles applicable to review by the Tax Court of ministerial determinations under subparagraph 3(2)(c)(ii) of the Act have been considered by the Federal Court of Appeal on more than one occasion. ... Purcell, [1996] 1 F.C. 644; 192 N.R. 148 (C.A.), per Robertson, J.A.” [22] It is the position of the agent for the appellants that there is a fourth reviewable error to be considered. ...

Nothing before me suggests that Counsel who advised them are unavailable and that any evidence considered necessary for the purposes of these appeals could not have been obtained from these sources. ... Counsel further argues that the excess amount should be considered a deemed dividend distributed by the company to the Appellant. [44] The relief sought is not within the scope of this Court’s jurisdiction. ... What the Appellant is seeking is tantamount to a declaratory Order instructing the Minister to reassess on a completely different basis, not previously advanced, and which has not been considered by the Minister. ...

All of these factors-- and the list is not exhaustive-- must be considered by the court and assigned their proper weight in the context of the particular case. [9] Obviously, if I went further than I should have in light of what Isaac C.J. said in Bayside, or if there is inconsistency between the two, Bayside must prevail. ... Wrights’ Canadian Ropes Ltd., contends the respondent, unless the Minister has not had regard to all the circumstances of the employment (as required by subparagraph 3(2)(c)(ii) of the Act), has considered irrelevant factors, or has acted in contravention of some principle of law, the Court may not interfere. ... (b) The second step involves the appellants’ adducing evidence to establish, if possible, either that some or all of the assumptions are wrong or that there are other material facts that the Minister failed to take into account and that he should have considered in exercising his discretion. ...

Lavoie stated that he considered the GP to be more of a non-profit organization (NPO) and that he was not familiar with the regulations governing the GP. ... It indicates, among other things, that the employees report directly to the board and that they must perform all other tasks considered necessary by the board ... The case law is clear that a shareholder may be considered as an employee under the control of the corporation in which he or she holds shares (see Canada (Attorney General) v. ...

and for the purposes of this definition,   (f)        where a qualified dependant resides with the dependant's female parent, the parent who primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant is presumed to be the female parent,   (g)        the presumption referred to in paragraph (f) does not apply in prescribed circumstances, and   (h)        prescribed factors shall be considered in determining what constitutes care and upbringing;   “qualified dependant” at any time means a person who at that time   (a) has not attained the age of 18 years,   (b) is not a person in respect of whom an amount was deducted under paragraph (a) of the description of B in subsection 118(1) in computing the tax payable under this Part by the person's spouse or common-law partner for the base taxation year in relation to the month that includes that time, and   (c) is not a person in respect of whom a special allowance under the Children's Special Allowances Act is payable for the month that includes that time;     [4]               In this particular case there is no dispute that the Appellant is the female parent of the Child. ... He considered it to be a conclusion of law "that has no place among the Minister's assumed facts".   25     I agree that legal statements or conclusions have no place in the recitation of the Minister's factual assumptions. ... All things considered, residence implies a certain constancy, a certain regularity or else a certain permanence according to a person's usual lifestyle in relation to a given place and is to be distinguished from what might be called visits or stays for specific purposes or of a sporadic nature. ...