Search - contravene

. — Insure that on air presentation is considered within the realm of quality broadcasting and does not contravene CRTC guidelines and insure, as best possible, that any comment by on air personnel is not libellous or slanderous. — Prepare all documentation required for renewal of broadcast licenses. — Approve all expenditures that may not be budget items, including overtime, staff and non staff talent fees. — Present for approval capital expenditures required to keep plant in neat, safe environment with considerations for the orderly replacement of obsolete equipment. — Negotiate contracts with all suppliers whether it be for sport properties, music services, program services, satellite reception, etc. ...

I verily believe this infringement contravenes my rights, declaration, and other laws as follows: A) Charter of Rights B) The Canadian Bill of Rights C) The United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racism D) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights E) The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights F) The International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women G) The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of “A Child”- 1991 H) Canada Action Plan for Children I) Campaign 2000 J) Child Development Initiative (1990)- Brighter Futures K) Twentieth Century Rights- as per Constitution L) International Year of the Family (1994) United Nations M) International Year for the Eradication of Poverty (1996) United Nations N) And any other reasons, laws, declaration the Appellant may formulate O) These are not facts, as so the Respondent states-these are laws ratified by Canada, and therefore law, and can not be denied. 17. ...

The grounds generally relate to “personal characteristics” which will usually be fundamental to an individual and not easily changed, except with great difficulty or cost. 24 It is well established that income level is not a personal characteristic and therefore distinctions based on income level do not contravene section 15 of the Charter. ...

The appellants claimed they did not contravene subsections 224(1.2), 224(4) and 224(10) of the Income Tax Act. 2 The Minister relied on the following facts in making his assessment in respect of Coopérative: [TRANSLATION] (a) the debtor assigned its property on October 22, 1992, following which the Superior Court of Quebec, sitting in bankruptcy, opened file no. 150-11-000355-925; (b) prior to the date of the bankruptcy, the debtor failed to remit to the Receiver General within the prescribed time period the federal income tax withheld from the salary it paid to its employees, which generated an income tax, penalties and interest account that reads as follows: DATE PERIOD ASSESSED FEDERAL TAX PENALTIES & INTEREST TOTAL 92/07/29 June 1992 remittances Penalty $919.08 $919.08 92/10/01 August 1992 remittances Penalty $375.84 $375.84 92/12/14 Difference T4-1992 $8,631.99- $8,631.99 Total $8,631.99 $1,294.92 $9,926.91 (c) thus, on October 22, 1992, the debtor owed the Minister $9,926.91; (d) on December 22, 1992, proofs of claim totalling $9,926.91 were filed by the Minister with the debtor's trustee in bankruptcy; (e) before the debtor assigned its property, the appellant had entered into a contract with the debtor and, at the time of the bankruptcy, owed it a contract holdback of $60,000; (f) on April 18, 1993, the respondent issued a requirement to pay to the appellant under subsection 224(1.2) of the Income Tax Act (the “ Act ”) claiming the sum of $9,926.91; (g) the said requirement to pay was renewed on July 21, 1993, September 2, 1993, December 3, 1993 and December 24, 1993, on which dates the amount claimed was reduced from $9,926.91 to $7,363.86, then to $4,562.86, to reflect the following payments received from the debtor's other creditors during that period: 93/08/31 Payment garnishment $2,563.05 93/12/21 Payment garnishment $2,801.00 Total $4,562.86 (h) the appellant did not show that it had good reasons not to comply with the said requirements to pay issued by the Minister; (i) as the appellant did not comply with the said requirements to pay, the Minister issued notice of assessment no. 7923 dated March 9, 1994, for an amount of $4,562.86. ...

  [39]         The difficulty the applicant faces in the matter at bar is that he cannot point to any operative provision of the Convention that being a considered resident of Canada for purposes of the Act would contravene. ... Instead, the Court examined Article IV (which related to dividends) of the convention and held that the definition of residency in the Act could not prevail over that Article [26]:   The amendments made in 1962 and 1965 to the Canada Income Tax Act (supra) contravene the provisions of the Canada-Netherlands Income Tax Convention and therefore ineffective to abrogate the provisions of Article IV(5) of such convention. ...

Firstly, since section 207.05 imposes a constitutionally valid tax and section 207.06 does not impose any tax, either alone or in combination with 207.05, the section cannot contravene section 53 of the Constitution Act. ... The parties were unable to provide responses precise or thorough enough to assist the Court satisfactorily. [78] The Federal Court of Appeal indicated that full examination of the text of the provisions, in light of the context and purpose, leads to the conclusion that if Parliament gave unconstrained and unfettered discretion to the Minister, then the textual delegation of the taxation authority may contravene section 53. ...

  [5]      However, the Caisse does have to justify this practice to the Federation because it contravenes the standards, and the Federation does not appreciate any deviation from its standards. ...

No. 876 found that the revised subparagraph 3(2)(c)(ii) of the old Act now known as paragraph 5(2)(ii) and subsection 5(3) of the new Act as reproduced at the beginning of this decision did not contravene with section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and was not discriminatory. ...

The Court held that such information sharing would not contravene section 8, writing:   With respect to the consequences related to s. 8 of the Charter, McKinlay Transport, supra, makes it clear that taxpayers have very little privacy interest in the materials and records that they are obliged to keep under the ITA, and that they are obliged to produce during an audit. ...

The situation was confused and feelings were unclear, but the situation appears to resemble an ambush much more than a deliberate decision by the appellant to contravene the Act. [26]     Unless an occurrence is purely accidental, individuals always have some share of responsibility for their acts. ...