Search - considered

(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. ...

As there is no other manner permitted by regulation in such a case, the only bases to be considered are cost and fair market value. ... There remain to be considered the different bases of computation submitted by appellant to establish a cost lower than 34.1 cents per share. ... In other words, no sale is considered as yielding any profit until the entire cost of the venture is recovered. ...

However, we considered the fact that you had significant equity in properties that you owned during the years 1991 to 2000 and could use this equity to meet your tax obligations and to cover the negative cash flows. ... As well, when it considered whether she had equity in her real estate holdings, CRA relied, in part, on its own appraised values of the Applicant’s properties ... The Decision alone has been considered on the issue of the adequacy of the reasons and has been found wanting ...

The defendant, on his mother’s death, considered converting the building into one big family home. ... I deal first with the defendant’s contention that, in effect, the whole of the land and premises ought to be considered as his principal residence. ... (g) ‘principal residence” of a taxpayer for a taxation year means a housing unit. a leasehold interest therein. or a share of the capital stock of a co-operative housing corporation. owned, whether jointly with another person or otherwise. in the year by the taxpayer. if the housing was. or if the share was acquired for the sole purpose of acquiring the right to inhabit a housing unit owned by the corporation that was, (1) ordinarily inhabited in the year by the taxpayer, his spouse or former spouse, or a child of the taxpayer who, during the year, was wholly dependent upon him for support and was a person described in subparagraph 109(1)(d)(i), (ii) or (iii), or (ii) property in respect of which the taxpayer has made an election for the year in accordance with subsection 45(2). except that. subject to section 54.1. in no case shall any such housing unit. interest or share. as the case may be, be considered to be a taxpayer's principal residence for a year (iii) unless it has been designated by him in prescribed manner to be his principal residence for that year and no other property has been so designated by him for that year, or (iv) by virtue of subparagraph (ii). if by virtue of that subparagraph the property would, but for this subparagraph. have been his principal residence for four or more previous taxation years. and for the purposes of this paragraph the “principal residence” of a taxpayer for a taxation year shall be deemed to include. except where the property consists of a share of the capital stock of a co-operative housing corporation, the land subjacent to the housing unit and such portion of any immediately contiguous land as may reasonably be regarded as contributing to the taxpayers use and enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence. except that where the total area of the subjacent land and of that portion exceeds one acre. the excess shall be deemed not to have contributed to the individual's use and enjoyment of the housing unit as a residence unless the taxpayer establishes that it was necessary to such use and enjoyment; While the building was not quite a duplex in its construction, it served, to my mind, the same practical function. ...

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. ...

The Minister of National Revenue considered this sum to be taxable in its entirety under the Income Tax Act (RSC 1952, c 148, as amended) and issued an assessment accordingly. The defendant disputed the assessment and finally convinced the Tax Review Board that $4,280.92 of the $22,954.25 he had received should not be considered remuneration from his employment and therefore did not have to be included in his income for 1975. ... There is nothing to indicate that such a specific comparison was considered by the employer. ...

(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. ...

Having considered Mr. Babich’s arguments on this point, and having reviewed the transcript, we do not accept that the conduct of the trial was unfair in any respect, or that anything said or done by the judge improperly led Mr. ... Having considered the judge’s reasons on this point, and the evidence, we are satisfied from the judge’s reasons that her conclusion is correct in law and is consistent with the evidence presented to her ... The judge considered that question and rejected it, primarily on the basis that there was no evidence of a shareholder loan. ...

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. ...

Generally, however, purchasers of stocks are considered to be investors. ... At the outset, the plaintiff considered himself to be an investor when he limited his purchase to “blue chip” stocks. ... In his judgment the learned judge discussed the evidence of a Mr Escaf which he considered to be credible in view of the conduct of the appellant and the purchase and sale of securities which were obviously not of “investment grade” but of “speculative grade”. ...