Search - contravene

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. ...

Such undertakings, albeit nameless, possess a full measure of validity insofar as they do not contravene the laws of public order and good morals. ...

"‘(2) Every person, who contravenes any provision of this part in respect of which no penalty is otherwise provided, shall be liable to a fine not exceeding 500 dollars, and each day’s continuance of the act or default out of which the offence arises shall constitute a separate offence; but nothing contained in this section nor the enforcement of any penalty thereunder shall suspend or affect any remedy for the recovery of any tax payable under this part or of any moneys in the hands of an employer belonging to His Majesty. ...

I‑3, invalid or constitutionally inapplicable to the appellant on the ground that they contravene subsection 92(2)   of the Constitution Act, 1867   by exceeding the territorial limit on provincial legislative competence?   ...