Search - considered

Hawkes applied to this Court for an Order that costs of trial be awarded to the applicants pursuant to Rule 147 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules and that (a) special directions be issued to the Taxing Officer pursuant to Rule 147 to tax the costs on a solicitor-client basis; or (b) special directions be issued to the Taxing Officer pursuant to Rule 147 to (i) allow reasonable amounts in excess of those listed in Tariff B of Schedule II of the Tax Court of Canada Rules; and (ii) allow amounts in respect of services reasonably rendered or disbursements reasonably incurred that are not included in Tariff B of Schedule II of the Tax Court of Canada Rules. 2 These motions are made through written representations and without appearance by counsel, pursuant to Rule 69(1) of the Tax Court of Canada Rules. 3 Substantial submissions were made by both the Applicants and the Respondent on this issue and the Court has considered the submissions as well as the provisions of Rule 69(1) and Rule 147 of the Rules. 4 Pursuant to section 147(1) of the Tax Court of Canada Rules- General Procedure, the awarding of costs is entirely discretionary. ...

(a)        each has considered his or her prospects now and for the future and his or her future financial security, whatever circumstances, catastrophic or otherwise, may arise in the future, including possible career reversals, the lack of employment opportunities, the contingencies of life including illness and disability, adverse economic circumstances such as rising costs and inflation, and the mismanagement of funds by themselves or others; and,   [...]   9.          MATRIMONIAL HOME:             The husband and the wife currently reside at 3139 Bartholomew Crescent, Mississauga, which home is in the name of CHAN and was always considered her home. ...   [10]          In my view, the factors considered above outweigh the others in the McKimmon criteria which favour the Appellant’s argument that the monthly payments constituted a support amount. ...

The Queen. [2] It reads as follows:   11        In drawing the line between "ordinary" negligence or neglect and "gross" negligence a number of factors have to be considered. ...   [8]               The following are some examples of facts which have not been considered as supporting a defence of due diligence. ...   [10]          The evidence shows that the facts in this case are closer to the facts considered by Judge Mogan in Khalil. ...

(a.2)     in the case of an impairment in physical or mental functions the effects of which are such that the individual’s ability to perform a single basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted or would be so restricted but for therapy referred to in paragraph (a.1), a medical practitioner has certified in prescribed form that the impairment is a severe and prolonged impairment in physical or mental functions the effects of which are such that the individual’s ability to perform a basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted or would be markedly restricted, but for therapy referred to in paragraph (a.1), where the medical practitioner is a medical doctor or, in the case of            (i)      a sight impairment, an optometrist,          (ii)     a speech impairment, a speech-language pathologist,          (iii)    a hearing impairment, an audiologist,          (iv)    an impairment with respect to an individual’s ability in feeding or dressing themself, an occupational therapist,          (v)     an impairment with respect to an individual’s ability in walking, an occupational therapist, or after February 22, 2005, a physiotherapist, and          (vi)    an impairment with respect to an individual’s ability in mental functions necessary for everyday life, a psychologist,   (c)     no amount in respect of remuneration for an attendant or care in a nursing home, in respect of the individual, is included in calculating a deduction under section 118.2 (otherwise than because of paragraph 118.2(2)(b.1)) for the year by the individual or by any other person, there may be deducted in computing the individual’s tax payable under this Part for the year the amount determined by the formula...          118.4(1) Nature of impairment — For the purposes of subsection 6(16), sections 118.2 and 118.3 and this subsection,   (a)     an impairment is prolonged where it has lasted, or can reasonably be expected to last, for a continuous period of at least 12 months; (b)     an individual’s ability to perform a basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted only where all or substantially all of the time, even with therapy and the use of appropriate devices and medication, the individual is blind or is unable (or requires an inordinate amount of time) to perform a basic activity of daily living; (b.1)  an individual is considered to have the equivalent of a marked restriction in a basic activity of daily living only where all or substantially all of the time, even with therapy and the use of appropriate devices and medication, the individual’s ability to perform more than one basic activity of daily living (including for this purpose, the ability to see) is significantly restricted, and the cumulative effect of those restrictions is tantamount to the individual’s ability to perform a basic activity of daily living being markedly restricted; (c)     a basic activity of daily living in relation to an individual means          (i)      mental functions necessary for everyday life,          (ii)     feeding oneself or dressing oneself, (iii)        speaking so as to be understood, in a quiet setting, by another person familiar with the individual, (iv)        hearing so as to understand, in a quiet setting, another person familiar with the individual, (v)          eliminating (bowel or bladder functions), or (vi)        walking; (c.1)  mental functions necessary for everyday life include          (i)      memory,          (ii)     problem solving, goal-setting and judgement (taken together), and          (iii)    adaptive functioning; (d)     for greater certainty, no other activity, including working, housekeeping or a social or recreational activity, shall be considered as a basic activity of daily living; and (e)     feeding oneself does not include (i)      any of the activities of identifying, finding, shopping for or otherwise procuring food, or (ii)     the activity of preparing food to the extent that the time associated with the activity would not have been necessary in the absence of a dietary restriction or regime; and                                (f)      dressing oneself does not include any of the activities of identifying, finding, shopping for or otherwise procuring clothing ...   [13]         The testimonies heard and the documents submitted do not make it possible to conclude that the appellant’s spouse could reasonably be considered to be a person with a severe and prolonged mental or physical impairment within the meaning of paragraph 118.4(1)(a) of the Act, namely, a disability lasting for a continuous period of at least twelve (12) months. ...

To be considered as continuous, the built-up area must not have a discontinuity exceeding two kilometres. In addition to the above, many other commercial, industrial and institutional land uses may be considered as urban even though they do not meet the population and density requirements. ... In answer to the appellant's argument concerning the joining of Kenora and Keewatin to form an urban area that meets the population count of 10,000 or more, the respondent's counsel argued that the definition did not require that the population density be 400 per square kilometre throughout because the second paragraph of the definition (as quoted above) states: In addition to the above, many other commercial, industrial and institutional land uses may be considered as urban even though they do not meet the population and density requirements. ...

Meirte of which he was the sole beneficiary; (c) that the Estate received and reported the receipt of interest in the amount of $10,795.37 and $17,041.95; (d) that the said amounts of $10,795.37 and $17,041.95 were the income of the Appellant, whether or not it was paid to him in the year; (e) that the said amounts referred to above were considered to be payable in the above taxation years in that the beneficiary of the Estate had an enforceable right to the income; and (f) that under the terms of the Will, and on the basis of the Appellant being the sole beneficiary of an Estate which he caused to be created, the amounts of $10,795.37 and $17,041.95 are considered to be payable to the Appellant, as the sole beneficiary, and should be included in his personal income. ... Subsection 104(24) provides that for the purposes of subsections (6) and (13), supra, an amount shall not be considered to be payable in a taxation year unless it was paid in the year to the person to whom it was payable or he was entitled in that year to enforce payment thereof. ...

was determined before that time to be a member of a class defined in the Humanitarian Designated Classes Regulations made under the Immigration Act,   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;   [5]              An eligible individual must be a resident of Canada, must reside with the qualified dependant and must be the parent who primarily fulfills the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant. ...   [6]              Regulation 6302 sets out the factors to be considered to determine what constitutes care and upbringing of a qualified dependant.   6302. Factors-- For the purposes of paragraph (h) of the definition “eligible individual” in section 122.6 of the Act, the following factors are to be considered in determining what constitutes care and upbringing of a qualified dependant:   1.                   ...

A deteriorated house and barn were considered of little or no value. Elmwood Drive runs from the centre of the city in a northerly direction. ... The respondent's expert viewed the property as very rural in nature, not to be compared with active residential development to the south of the TransCanada Highway and to be considered without sewer or water services. ... Having considered all of the evidence as to value, I have come to the conclusion that the appellants have over stated and the respondent under stated the value. ...

This passage from Freud (supra) at 443 (DTC 5282) is applicable to the instant case, and I quote: It is, of course, obvious that a loan made by a person who is not in the business of lending money is ordinarily to be considered as an investment. It is only under quite exceptional or unusual circumstances that such an operation should be considered as a speculation. however, the circumstances of the present case are quite unusual and exceptional. ... Under those circumstances, the outlay made by respondent in the last year, when the speculative nature of the undertaking was even more marked than at the outset due to financial difficulties, cannot be considered as an investment. ...

  [4]              The Separation Agreement specified that the parties recognized and acknowledged that they were agreeing to child support based upon section 9 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines dealing with shared custody and that they had considered the increased costs of the shared-custody arrangement, including appropriate housing, transportation and the duplication of necessities.   ... Analysis   [11]         This issue has been considered several times by this Court and it has consistently dismissed taxpayers’ appeals in cases of shared custody. ... Rather, section 9 starts off from a simple set-off but requires further considerations to be considered and appropriate adjustments made in setting child support. ...