Search - considered

Ritchie”) the Supreme Court of Canada considered a contingency fee arrangement and, in the context of an award of costs, concluded that (para 28): (…) Unsuccessful defendants should expect to pay similar amounts by way of costs across similar pieces of litigation involving similar conduct and counsel, regardless of what arrangements the particular plaintiff may have concluded with counsel. ...

He referred to regulation 7306 of the Income Tax Regulations as evidence that the Minister considered $0.53 / km for the first 5,000 km and $0.47 / km thereafter to be a reasonable rate in 2012. ...

How the ultimate amount of the vehicle allowance is reconciled is not considered within the operative sections. ...

However a waiver cannot be withdrawn if it is too late or if the withdrawal would result in an injustice to the promisee. [15]          The first issue to be considered is whether or not a Waiver requires consideration. ...

T he Decision must be considered within the context of the  result and the complete record in order to determine whether it falls within a range of possible acceptable outcomes (Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses’ Union v Newfoundland and Labrador (Treasury Board), 2011 SCC 62, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 708 at para 14; Dunsmuir at para 47). ...

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. ...

Malone and considered fundamental in common law Canada, (1) the language of the alleged settlor must be imperative; (2) the subject-matter or trust property must be certain, (3) the objects of the trust must be certain. ...

The Commission explained that it had considered the Investigator’s report, as well as Ms. ...

Consequently, it cannot have conferred a benefit on him because he is the one who confers legitimacy on Gexco as a general contractor, in the construction market. [32]   The appellant also argues that the use of Gexco’s workers in the construction of his residence is not relevant in determining whether he received a benefit. [33]   It should first be noted that the appellant’s experience and skills, which are not in dispute, must be distinguished from what constitutes a benefit within the meaning of the Act. [34]   The appellant admits that the residence was built for personal purposes, but that Gexco was involved for purely practical reasons. [35]   However, as it was expressly shown in Gexco’s books, the accounting treatment applied to the construction of his residence was considered [TRANSLATION] “income from contracts” and no management fees were calculated and no profit was recorded. [36]   In addition, it was shown that Gexco’s profit margin in relation to all of its other construction projects was at least 8.09%. [37]   Shareholder benefits were at issue in Park Haven Designs Inc. v. ...

None of the travel arrangements for which invoices were attached to the Affidavit of Olinda Samuel, could be considered lavish expenses. (2) Costs Relating to Transcripts and Printing [31]   Finally, the disbursement costs, claimed for transcripts covering the several hearing dates and the printing and reproduction of various documents relating to the proceedings, are reasonable and were supported by invoices attached to the Affidavit of Olinda Samuel. ...