Search - considered

  [8]    The Quebec Court of Appeal considered the effect of a modification of an agreement for alimentary position in M.N.K. c. ... Obviously, there is no way to vary something that is entirely unknown for the moment (in the case at bar, the judgment which, after coming before the Court of Appeal, will be considered the original judgment concerning the allowance.) ... To the extent that it made a determination respecting an uncertain future, the judgment fixing the allowance is in some way a conditional judgment (it is unimportant whether the condition is considered suspensive or resolutory) which will only be lawful so long as the circumstances of the parties have not changed. ...

That he considered himself to be obligated to pay as long as she was in school is shown by his having paid all amounts due under the Separation Agreement, even after Adrienne's 21 st birthday. ... CHILD SUPPORT: 3.1 The husband shall pay to the wife for the financial support of the child, Adrienne Dawn Werby, born June 28, 1979 the sum of $200.00 per week, starting on December 8, 1995, until one or more of the following occurs: (a) the child stops living full time with the wife, and "living full time" includes the child living away from home to attend an educational institution, pursue summer employment or enjoy a vacation but otherwise maintaining a residence with the wife; (b) the child becomes 18 years old and ceases to be in full time attendance at an educational institution; (c) the child becomes 21 years old; (d) the child completes an undergraduate degree; (e) the child obtains full time employment; (f) the child marries; or (g) the child dies. 3.2 Adrienne Dawn Werby is eligible for support and maintenance in spite of the fact that she may be receiving income from some part time or vacation employment provided that she is in normal full time attendance at a university, college or accredited institution of learning. 3.3 Payments shall begin when and if Adrienne Dawn Werby, after ceasing normal full time attendance at a university, college or accredited institution of learning, resumes full time attendance. 3.4 Adrienne is considered to be living with the wife even if she has a separate residence from the wife as long as she is in normal full time attendance at a university, college or accredited institution of learning unless she is living with the husband. 3.5 Payments shall recommence when and if Adrienne, after ceasing to live with the wife starts living again with the wife. 4.          ... Those support payments shall be deemed deductible by the husband as periodic payments on his 1995 tax return and includable by the wife on the calculation of her income for tax purposes for 1995 and shall be considered as paid and received under the provisions of subsection 56.1 and 60.1 of the Income Tax Act (Canada), as amended. 5.          ...

M.N.R. [5] are factors to be considered." These four factors are: (1) control; (2) ownership of the tools; (3) chance of profit; (4) risk of loss. [8]      In presenting argument on behalf of his wife, Mr. ... While this in itself would not be sufficient to establish her status as an independent contractor, when considered with all of the other evidence, it becomes significant. ... No. 771 (F.C.A.) [5] [1986] 2 C.T.C. 200 (F.C.A.) [6] See the following cases which considered similar facts: Arseneau v. ...

(denied)   (n)        When establishing the insurable hours, the Minister considered that the hours actually worked and for which the Appellant was paid totalled 282.75 hours: (denied)                 Period of 7/5/01 to 2/7/01:       182.75 hours             Period of 3/7/01 to 30/11/01:   100.00 hours             Total:                                        282.75 hours   (o)        In establishing the insurable earnings, the Minister added $1,000 to the amounts indicated in the three records of employment the Payor issued, for $2,140.92. ... Section 9.1 of the Employment Insurance Regulations states:               Where a person's earnings are paid on an hourly basis, the person is considered to have worked in insurable employment for the number or hours that the person actually worked and for which the person was remunerated ...   [12]     In determining this case, the following, from subsection 2(2) of the Insurable Earnings and Collection of Premiums Regulations must be considered:   …the total amount of earnings that an insured person has…except for any unpaid amount that is in respect of overtime or that would have been paid by reason of termination of the employment ...

Thibault, the tax was paid out of the ticket price because he considered it as having been collected. ... He considered that, at that time, the tax no longer had any relation to the price of the tickets. [7]      The respondent produced the two objections officers responsible for the case: Alain Therrien and Dany Lévesque. ... The issue of admissions being exempt from tax never arose. [8]      Dany Lévesque testified that, for the purposes of the assessments, he had considered only the input tax credits and had wondered whether the appellant was entitled to them. ...

The problem has often been considered in actions brought under s. 4(1)(e)(i) of the Divorce Act and, generally speaking, a finding that the parties were living separate and apart from each other has been made where the following circumstances were present: (i)          Spouses occupying separate bedrooms. ... I do not consider that separate finances before, during and after separation and coverage of the husband under the health care plan of the Appellant were sufficient factors to alter the foregoing conclusion. [14]     Consequently since they were considered to be living separate and apart, the Appellant was entitled to the Child Tax Benefit Credit claimed as well as the Goods and Services Tax Credit claimed. Those credits are not to be reduced because of Roger's income. [15]     Further, in my opinion, the Appellant was entitled to the deduction for a wholly dependent person under paragraph 118(1)(b) since she was a person who was married and who neither supported nor lived with her husband (since they were considered to be living separate and apart) and she was not supported by her spouse and moreover she, jointly with her husband, maintained a self-contained domestic establishment (in which she lived) and actually supported in that establishment a person who at that time was her child, namely, Stephen, who was under the age of 18. [16]     For all of the above reasons the appeals are allowed, without costs.           ...

., [2003] 2 C.T.C. 2363 (T.C.C.) considered the inconsistencies in prior cases. ... Justice Bowie's reasoning, with which I agree, is as follows: [6]         I accept that the concluding words of paragraph 118.2(2)(n) of the Act, considered in its context as part of a series of provisions designed to provide a measure of relief from the burden of income tax to people who suffer, or as in this case whose dependants suffer, from illness, is capable of more than one meaning. ... It is not necessary, however, for me to decide whether Judges Teskey and Miller were correct in their conclusion that a sale by a pharmacy is all that is required to satisfy paragraph (n); I am unable to find that a purchase which does not involve a pharmacy or a pharmacist can qualify. [15]     There remains to be considered Ms. ...

It is not disputed that the Appellant failed to maintain a mileage log in respect of either vehicle and during a meeting with a Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) assessor estimated that he drove approximately 40,000 kilometres per year of which 21,000 (or 53%) was considered by the assessor to be business-related. [10]     The Appellant resided in or near Entwistle some 40 kilometres north of Drayton Valley (Drayton) which was Brandette's base. He testified that there is no dispute that when he drove to Drayton and "from there out to a lease" the travel from Drayton to his home was properly considered as personal use of the vehicle. ... Notwithstanding this the trips were considered by CCRA as personal, that is home to work. ...

The Minister of National Revenue has considered the information and reasons set forth in your application and renders the following decision. ... The Notice of Objection is considered to be filed as of the date of this letter. ... However, the fact remains that the Appellant was granted an extension of time and was also told that the Minister considered that he had a valid Notice of Objection filed with the Minister which would satisfy the requirements of section 301 of the Excise Tax Act. ...

.-                      The Minister did not take into account that the bonuses to the two brothers were slightly higher than for the arm's length employees, $100 versus $200 or $300. [9]      Taken together, these factors indicate that the employment terms that the Minister considered were quite different from the actual terms and conditions of employment for each of Simon and Charles Amyotte. ... This cannot be considered substantially similar to arm's length employment terms. ... APPENDIX Assumptions of Fact In deciding as he did, the Minister relied on the following assumptions of fact: (a)       the Appellant is in the construction business; (b)      the shareholders of the Appellant are Real and Leona Amyotte; (c)      Real Amyotte controlled the day to day operation of the appellant; (d)      the Workers are the sons of Real and Leona Amyotte; (e)       the Workers and the Appellant are related to each other within the within the meaning of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.) c. 1, as amended (the " Act "); (f)       Simon was a superintendent at job sites and his duties included overseeing the job, organizing the workers, and manual labour; (g)      Simon also performed estimating duties at the Appellant's office from time to time; (h)      Simon has an engineering designation; (i)       Charles was a carpenter's apprentice and a foreman's assistant; (j)       Charles also performed foreman duties from time to time; (k)      Simon earned a set annual salary; (l)       Charles earned a set wage of $16.00 per hour; (m)     the Workers were paid on a bi-weekly basis; (n)      employment insurance premiums were withheld from the Workers wages; (o)      the Appellant set the Workers' wages, based on industry standards, according to their qualifications; (p)      arm's length employees are paid according to their qualifications in the same manner as the Workers; (q)      the Workers received vacation benefits; (r)       Simon normally worked 44 to 50 hours per week, Monday to Friday; (s)       Charles normally worked 44 hours per week, Monday to Friday; (t)       Charles' hours of work were recorded; (u)      Simon's work was not supervised but was subject to inspection; (v)      Charles was supervised by a foreman; (w)      the Workers notified the Appellant of any leave required; (x)      if the Workers were unavailable they would have been replaced; (y)      the Workers did not have signing authority for the business bank and had not guaranteed loans; (z)       the Appellant provided the tools and equipment required; (aa)     Charles provided his own hand tools; (bb)    the Workers were employed under a contract of service with the Appellant; (cc)     the Workers did not put their wages back into the Appellant's business; (dd)    the Workers worked under the same terms and conditions as arm's length employees; (ee)     the Minister considered all of the relevant facts that were made available to him, including the remuneration paid, the terms and conditions, the duration and the nature and importance of the work performed; and (ff)      the Minister was satisfied that it was reasonable to conclude that the Workers and the Appellant would have entered into a substantially similar contract of employment if they had been dealing with each other at arm's length. ...