Search - considered

By my Order of October 11, 2013, I held that certain portions of the affidavits of Pierre Léveillé, Rob Coelho, Jim Stathakos, and Anuradha Marisetti were inadmissible and would not be considered by me on the pending motions for summary relief ... Collins on this motion, which ought to be considered her best foot forward, comprises only of a brief affidavit sworn by her on December 13, 2011, with six exhibits. ... Collins’ motion for summary judgment was heard at the same time, so the record contains what should be considered the best foot forward of both parties ...

As a result, he concluded that subsection 55(2) did not apply because CU and CUH were subject to Part IV tax and because the refunds of Part IV tax were occasioned, not as part of the ATCOR/Forest series of transactions giving rise to the deemed dividends and the significant reduction in capital gains, but by independent transactions. [41] In arriving at this conclusion, the trial judge considered three approaches to the question of whether the normal course dividends and the ATCOR/Forest series of transactions were all part of the same series: 1.         ... It is only necessary to determine whether each of the transactions in the alleged series was preordained (as defined in OSFC). to produce a final result and whether those preordained transactions did in fact take place. [58] For these reasons, the trial judge should not have considered the second and third parts of the test set out in Craven v. ... If the parties intend that a transaction with an independent purpose and existence will assist in achieving this composite result and have the ability to ensure that the independent transaction is carried out and the transaction is in fact carried out, the independent transaction will be considered a part of the series. [66] The trial judge found as a fact that both the ATCOR/Forest series of transactions and the normal course dividends were preordained. ...

In an assessment dated June 25, 1996, for the 1992 taxation year, the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) considered that the Appellant was not entitled to any non-capital loss from previous years and carried forward the amount of $2,499,358 as a non-capital loss to subsequent years.   6.         ... In this regard, we agree with the conclusion of the Federal Court of Appeal that “the entry of new persons... will be considered to constitute the creation of a new partnership, provided of course, that the requisite components of the definition... are satisfied” (para. 51).  ... The Supreme Court of Canada seems to have considered that there was a carrying on of business in common between the new partners and the former partners whereas it considered that that was not the case in Backman for the following reasons:   20                 However, despite the similarities between the transactions in this case and those in Backman, there are some essential differences.  ...

From the definitions of the common dictionaries and the decisions cited above, the conditions that appear essential for an organization to be considered as a religious order are, in my view, first that the members adhere to the particular rules uniting them ina a formal way and that those particular rules governing them be more compelling than those that consist simply in ratifying the beliefs established by the religion or the denomination to which they already belong. ... It follows that the appellant may not be considered as a member of a religious order. ... An assembly or gathering of persons of different religious denominations for activities that are not strictly regular religious activities of a religion or particular denomination cannot be considered as a congregation. ...

This is especially so when the precedent represents the considered views of firm majorities (para. 57). [25]                           Nonetheless, this Court has overruled its own decisions on a number of occasions.  ... As noted above, she stated:                             In my view, the combination question should be interpreted to require only an examination of the cumulative effect of the aggregate of the capital invested in farming and a second source of income, the aggregate of the income derived from farming and a second source of income, and the aggregate of the time spent on farming and on the second source of income, considered in the light of the taxpayer’s ordinary mode of living, farming history, and future intentions and expectations.  ... For these reasons, Hershfield T.C.C.J. determined that the horse-racing operation was a chief source of income on the basis of its contribution to the combination test in s. 31(1). [47]                           Having considered the relevant factors, Hershfield T.C.C.J. found that farming, in combination with Mr. ...

On the other hand, the estate was apparently assessed on the basis that the entire assets should be considered as having passed to the widow Dame Dagenais, which conclusion I have rejected. ... Witness justified this by stating that as a matter of sound business practice the trust company would be obliged to invest moneys it received at current interest rates and he considered it conservative to place them at current rates for a 1-year term deposit although higher rates would have been available for deposits for longer terms. ... Despite this, however, Parliament apparently considered it necessary, when coverage was to be extended to self-employed fishermen otherwise excepted under s 27(b), to add s 29(2) of the Act. ...

The evidence is that in 1947 the parent company considered that its investment in its two subsidiaries was out of balance by several million dollars as compared with similar operations in the United States. ... To extend the statutory deduction in the converse case would add to the anomaly and open the way for borrowed capital to become involved in a complication of remote effects that cannot be considered as having been contemplated by Parliament. ... An instance of such an allowance was considered by this Court in Stock Exchange Building Corporation Limited v. ...

Some of the factors she alluded to can be considered in the broader context of the several factors of Happy Valley Farms and others in addition thereto and reference will be made to those relevant factors below. ... The difficulty I have with this argument is that if the Appellant was in such position and had, as it testified earlier, considered the project to belong to the other members, why did it not just loan the monies to the remaining members or joint venture and take back mortgage security on the Joint Venture property for the loan and even the initial loan. It seems to me the Appellant had other options to protect and even enhance its security but did not explain why no such other options were considered. ...

So too, where investment income is at issue, it must be viewed in relation to its connection to the Reserve, its benefit to the traditional Native way of life, the potential danger to the erosion of Native property and the extent to which it may be considered as being derived from economic mainstream activity. ... We should indicate that the concept of "commercial mainstream" is not a test for determining whether property is situated on a reserve; it is merely an aid to be used in evaluating the various factors being considered. ... In addition, as mentioned above, the Federal Court of Appeal stated that the following factors should be considered: 11.               ...

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. ...