Search - considered

  [19]         On balance, having considered the overall evidence on this point, I am satisfied that while a post-doctoral fellow at McGill University in 2008, Mr. Lahlou was considered by the university and himself to be a student at the university. ... In Huang, Woods J. considered the meaning of the term “student” used in the education credit provisions in the case of a post-doctoral fellow. ...

  [22]            Similar guidelines considered in the respondent’s fairness review process were addressed by the Court in Dorothea Knitting Mills Ltd. v. ... The March 7, 2005 letter demonstrates that the Minister did not close his mind to the arguments put forward by the applicant but considered them fully. ... In these proceedings, the applicant has been unable to identify any significant factor advanced on its behalf that was not considered by the respondent in arriving at his decision ...

This information was considered part of his "second level" fairness request. [15] m)         Mr. ... This information was considered as part of the "second level" fairness request. ... Williams considered the following in respect of Mr. Grundy's request for fairness relief:             i)          the guidelines set out in Information Circular 92-2 (the "Guidelines"); [20]             ii)         the landlord tenant agreement between Mr. ...

Accommodation of needs (2) For any practice mentioned in paragraph (1)(a) to be considered to be based on a bona fide occupational requirement and for any practice mentioned in paragraph (1)(g) to be considered to have a bona fide justification, it must be established that accommodation of the needs of an individual or a class of individuals affected would impose undue hardship on the person who would have to accommodate those needs, considering health, safety and cost. [...] ... The government has chosen to allocate the credit on the basis of the family unit because it considered it to be the most equitable option. ... In Lister, supra, the Court of Appeal considered an analogous argument with respect to differentiation on the basis of age. ...

It also explains how taxpayers or employers can make a request to cancel or waive interest and penalties for years dating back to 1985, and describes the information required for such requests to be considered. [...] ... I agree with the respondent's submission that the standard of review to be applied in this case is patent unreasonableness. [31]            Many cases have considered the standard of review when the Minister's discretionary decision-making is being scrutinized by this Court. In Kaiser, supra, Rouleau J. considered the standard of review of subsection 220(3.1) decisions at and stated at paragraph 9: The jurisprudence has established the standard to be employed by the Courts when called upon to review the exercise of a discretionary power such as the one in question here. ...

Canada (Canada Customs and Revenue Agency) (2001), 213 F.T.R. 94, 2001 FCT 1139, the respondent contends that it properly considered the extraordinary circumstances raised by the applicant and simply determined that the applicant's failure to comply with the Act was not attributable to the circumstances cited. [24]            In sum, the respondent submits that its discretion was fairly and properly exercised under subsection 220(3.1) based on relevant considerations and a reasonable decision was made on the basis of the available facts. ... It also explains how taxpayers or employers can make a request to cancel or waive interest and penalties for years dating back to 1985, and describes the information required for such requests to be considered. [...] ... The following factors will be considered when determining whether or not the Department will cancel or waive interest or penalties: (a) whether or not the taxpayer or employer has a history of compliance with tax obligations; (b) whether or not the taxpayer or employer has knowingly allowed a balance to exist upon which arrears interest has accrued; (c) whether or not the taxpayer or employer has exercised a reasonable amount of care and has not been negligent or careless in conducting their affairs under the self-assessment system; (d) whether or not the taxpayer or employer has acted quickly to remedy any delay or omission. [...] ...

Apotex also says that there is no evidence before me on these motions that there is, indeed, more than one formulation. [36]            For purposes of these motions, I have considered the various grounds of resistance raised by Apotex. ... That factor would have been considered at the time of the original order. ... I accept that review of the tax liability of the Canadian corporate respondent was not considered at least in the court action at the time the "confidentiality orders" were made and in a sense this is a new circumstance. ...

Apotex also says that there is no evidence before me on these motions that there is, indeed, more than one formulation. [36]            For purposes of these motions, I have considered the various grounds of resistance raised by Apotex. ... That factor would have been considered at the time of the original order. ... I accept that review of the tax liability of the Canadian corporate respondent was not considered at least in the court action at the time the "confidentiality orders" were made and in a sense this is a new circumstance. ...

Even if the February 5 phasing was to be considered an error, I would find it to be an inconsequential error. ... Based on their review of the original KPMG study and subsequent enhancement, all parties considered the study flawed and its findings to be unreliable. ... The memorandum stated that all parties considered the KPMG reports to be inadequate:          Based on their view of the original KPMG study and subsequent enhancement, all parties considered the study flawed and its findings to be unreliable. ...

In making his decision, he considered the summary prepared by Ms. Co and the recommendation of Ms. ... No 986, Dubé J. considered the scope of the duty to act fairly in the context of subsection 220(3.1) and stated at paragraph 9:          A duty to act fairly, in general, means a duty to observe the rudiments of natural justice in the exercise of administrative functions. ... In that case, Jerome A.C.J., as he then was, held that the "Fairness Committee" which considered the applicant's request for discretionary relief made a reviewable error in failing to advise the applicants of the facts which it would consider in granting the relief and in failing to provide the applicants an opportunity to make representations. ...