Search - contravene

Since subsection 1 of section 6 applies to all employers who fail to collect and pay over taxes under the provisions of Part 1, and subsection 2 applies to everybody who contravenes any provision of Part 1, this is solid ground for the inference that the duties imposed by sections 4 and 5, in respect of which section 6 provides the sanctions, are duties which the statute contemplates [Page 49] shall be performed in the province. ... No employee shall have any right of action against his employer in respect of any moneys deducted from his wages and paid over to the administrator by the employer in compliance or intended compliance with this section. (2) Every employer shall, with each payment made by him to the administrator under this section, furnish to the administrator a return showing all taxes imposed by this part on the employees of the employer in respect of wages during the period covered by the return, which shall be in the form and verified in the manner prescribed by the administrator. (3) Every employer who deducts or retains the amount of any tax under this part from the wages of his employee shall be deemed to hold the same in trust for His Majesty and for the payment over of the same in the manner and at the time provided under this part. 6. (1) If an employer, in violation of the provisions of this part fail to collect and pay over any tax imposed by this part, the administrator may demand and collect from him as a penalty ten per cent. of the tax payable, and he shall in addition be liable to a fine of ten dollars for each day of default, but not to more than two hundred dollars. (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 five hundred 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. 7. ...

Part B – Constitutional Challenge Under Sections 7 and 15 of the Charter [7] Part B of this appeal determines whether the exclusion of refugee claimants from the CCB violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. [6] [8] The Appellants claim that interpreting the ITA and the IRPA to exclude refugee claimants from the CCB contravenes their right to security of the person under section 7 of the Charter in a way that is not within the principles of fundamental justice. [9] The Appellants also claim that the denying of the CCB contravenes their right to equality under section 15 of the Charter on the enumerated ground of race or on an analogous grounds of immigration status. ...

No oleomargarine, butterine or other substitute for butter, manufactured from any animal substance other than milk, shall be manufactured in Canada, or sold therein, and every person who contravenes the provisions of this Act in any manner whatsoever shall incur a penalty not exceeding four hundred dollars and not less than two hundred dollars, and in default of payment shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve months and not less than three months. ...

The Queen, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 370, at p. 400), establishes the core features of the military justice system, including the categories of persons subject to the CSD, the “service offences” (as defined in s. 2   NDA  ) which contravene the CSD, the jurisdiction of military courts (or “service tribunals”, as defined in s. 2   NDA  ) to try these offences, and the processes for challenging their decisions. [3]                               Section 130(1)(a) creates, by way of incorporation, service offences that add to those already contained in the CSD. ... Validly enacted offences that contravene this code have always been understood as offences under “military law”. ...

Those measures were proposed in the federal budget introduced in the House of Commons on March 22, 2017, nearly 24 years after the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Friedberg. [193] When those provisions were introduced, the Department of Finance stated that “ [s]traddle transactions raise significant tax base and fairness concerns ” and therefore “ specific legislation is proposed to clarify that these transactions contravene the scheme of the Income Tax Act. ” [156] In particular, the supplementary information that accompanied Budget 2017 stated: To the extent that the use of the realization method for computing gains and losses on derivatives held on income account can be supported in a given case, it may allow taxpayers to selectively realize gains and losses on these derivatives through, for example, straddle transactions. ... Accordingly, specific legislation is proposed to clarify that these transactions contravene the scheme of the Income Tax Act. ...

I infer that what they intend is that a broad discretionary power cannot be exercised in a manner that contravenes the Charter or the Bill of Rights (see Slaight Communications Inc. v. ...

The CCRA does not, however, consider a transfer of property to a related corporation on a tax-deferred basis to contravene the object and spirit of the Act. ...