Search - convention

Tax Convention as defined in Section 6(a) of the Protocol. The appeals are therefore dismissed with costs. ...

Refugee Convention” and substituting therefor the discretion of the Immigration Appeal Board. ... (United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees HCR/INF/29/Rev. 2, Chapter 1, Article 1, paragraph A(2).) ... Consequently, the fact that the Immigration Appeal Board Act refers to the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees does not have the effect of incorporating into Canadian domestic law the prohibition contained in that Convention against deporting refugees. ...

About one year later, on February 4, 2019, the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD] of the IRB dismissed their appeal and confirmed the RPD’s finding that the Applicants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection as defined in sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA], pursuant to IRPA s 111(1)(a). [6]   For the reasons that follow, this application for judicial review of the RAD’s decision is granted. ... Canada confers refugee protection upon individuals who are found to be Convention Refugees or Persons in Need of Protection: IRPA ss 95-97. 95 (1) Refugee protection is conferred on a person when 95 (1) L’asile est la protection conférée à toute personne dès lors que, selon le cas: (a) the person has been determined to be a Convention refugee or a person in similar circumstances under a visa application and becomes a permanent resident under the visa or a temporary resident under a temporary resident permit for protection reasons; a) sur constat qu’elle est, à la suite d’une demande de visa, un réfugié au sens de la Convention ou une personne en situation semblable, elle devient soit un résident permanent au titre du visa, soit un résident temporaire au titre d’un permis de séjour délivré en vue de sa protection; (b) the Board determines the person to be a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection; or b) la Commission lui reconnaît la qualité de réfugié au sens de la Convention ou celle de personne à protéger; (c) except in the case of a person described in subsection 112(3), the Minister allows an application for protection. c) le ministre accorde la demande de protection, sauf si la personne est visée au paragraphe 112(3). (2) A protected person is a person on whom refugee protection is conferred under subsection (1), and whose claim or application has not subsequently been deemed to be rejected under subsection 108(3), 109(3) or 114(4). (2) Est appelée personne protégée la personne à qui l’asile est conféré et dont la demande n’est pas ensuite réputée rejetée au titre des paragraphes 108(3), 109(3) ou 114(4). 96 A Convention refugee is a person who, by reason of a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion, 96 A qualité de réfugié au sens de la Convention — le réfugié — la personne qui, craignant avec raison d’être persécutée du fait de sa race, de sa religion, de sa nationalité, de son appartenance à un groupe social ou de ses opinions politiques: (a) is outside each of their countries of nationality and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of each of those countries; or a) soit se trouve hors de tout pays dont elle a la nationalité et ne peut ou, du fait de cette crainte, ne veut se réclamer de la protection de chacun de ces pays; (b) not having a country of nationality, is outside the country of their former habitual residence and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to return to that country. b) soit, si elle n’a pas de nationalité et se trouve hors du pays dans lequel elle avait sa résidence habituelle, ne peut ni, du fait de cette crainte, ne veut y retourner. 97 (1) A person in need of protection is a person in Canada whose removal to their country or countries of nationality or, if they do not have a country of nationality, their country of former habitual residence, would subject them personally 97 (1) A qualité de personne à protéger la personne qui se trouve au Canada et serait personnellement, par son renvoi vers tout pays dont elle a la nationalité ou, si elle n’a pas de nationalité, dans lequel elle avait sa résidence habituelle, exposée: (a) to a danger, believed on substantial grounds to exist, of torture within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention Against Torture; or a) soit au risque, s’il y a des motifs sérieux de le croire, d’être soumise à la torture au sens de l’article premier de la Convention contre la torture; (b) to a risk to their life or to a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment if b) soit à une menace à sa vie ou au risque de traitements ou peines cruels et inusités dans le cas suivant: (i) the person is unable or, because of that risk, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of that country, (i) elle ne peut ou, de ce fait, ne veut se réclamer de la protection de ce pays, (ii) the risk would be faced by the person in every part of that country and is not faced generally by other individuals in or from that country, (ii) elle y est exposée en tout lieu de ce pays alors que d’autres personnes originaires de ce pays ou qui s’y trouvent ne le sont généralement pas, (iii) the risk is not inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions, unless imposed in disregard of accepted international standards, and (iii) la menace ou le risque ne résulte pas de sanctions légitimes — sauf celles infligées au mépris des normes internationales — et inhérents à celles-ci ou occasionnés par elles, (iv) the risk is not caused by the inability of that country to provide adequate health or medical care. (iv) la menace ou le risque ne résulte pas de l’incapacité du pays de fournir des soins médicaux ou de santé adéquats. (2) A person in Canada who is a member of a class of persons prescribed by the regulations as being in need of protection is also a person in need of protection. (2) A également qualité de personne à protéger la personne qui se trouve au Canada et fait partie d’une catégorie de personnes auxquelles est reconnu par règlement le besoin de protection. [2]   The RPD is the authorized decision maker in respect of a refugee claim: IRPA s 107(1). 107 (1) The Refugee Protection Division shall accept a claim for refugee protection if it determines that the claimant is a Convention refugee or person in need of protection, and shall otherwise reject the claim. 107 (1) La Section de la protection des réfugiés accepte ou rejette la demande d’asile selon que le demandeur a ou non la qualité de réfugié ou de personne à protéger ...

I am in agreement with the decision not to assess since to do so in light of the knowledge that the beneficial owners were residents of the US would contravene Article XI of the Canada-US Convention. ... Consequently, since in this cse the address of the “apparent nominee” is in the United States, the Canada-US Tax Convention applies and only 15% should be deducted. ... Both counsel agreed that section 10(4) of the Income Tax Application Rules and Article XI of the Canada-US Tax Convention applied. ...

Justice Shore BETWEEN: FAZAL KARAM Applicant and MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent JUDGMENT AND REASONS [1]   This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD] dated January 9, 2019, in which it was concluded that the Applicant is not a Convention Refugee, confirming a previous decision of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD], due to lack of credibility. [2]   The RAD rejected the Applicant’s appeal as the Applicant’s conduct was inconsistent with that of a genuine refugee who would have reason to fear persecution in Pakistan. [3]   The RAD dismissed the Applicant’s appeal in its confirmation of the Applicant’s lack of credibility, not due to exclusion from refugee protection as per Section 1E of the Refugee Convention, but in respect of both his behaviour and narrative. [4]   The behaviour of the Applicant was not credible when analyzed on the basis of his narrative. [5]   Subsequent to the failure of the Applicant’s business in the United Arab Emirates [UAE], the RAD found the Applicant’s return to the UAE as implausible under the circumstances and in the context described by the Applicant. [6]   The Applicant’s obtention of a visitor’s visa to visit his brother in Canada and his travel activity subsequent to the failure of his business in the UAE, did not appear to have any plausible basis under the circumstances of the Applicant’s narrative. [7]   Key documents submitted to bolster the Applicant’s claim lacked authenticity, and one important document was considered on its face as fraudulent in respect of background to his narrative. [8]   No reasonable basis for apprehension of persecution exists in the narrative of the Applicant’s claim due to it lacking substance (Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v Davoodabadi, 2019 FC 350; Darabos v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2008 FC 484 at para 20). [9]   The Applicant did not discharge the burden of establishing that the conclusions based on the evidence, as effectively analyzed by the RAD, were unreasonable. ...

Income Tax Convention. At 1162 there is the following paragraph in the judgment: The term '‘permanent establishment” normally interpreted suggests something more substantial than a license, a letterhead and isolated activities. ... Income Tax Convention thereto, the Court hereby dismisses the appeals. ...

He also lectures to university students on this subject, has been active in associations of anaesthetists for more than twenty- five years, has attended medical conventions in various parts of the world, and is also an author of articles on this subject. ... Monet I quote the following: “The issue before the Board is whether or not the expenses incurred by the appellant in 1951 to attend conventions and Board of Directors’ meetings meet the test of having been incurred by him for the purpose of gaining or producing the income from his profession which, under the provisions of Section 127 (1) (e) of the Act, is a business.” ...

Les faits de cet appel sont bien énoncés au paragraphe 14 de la Réponse amendée à l’avis d’appel amendé qui se lit comme suit: En cotisant l’appelante, l’intimé s’est fondé, entre autres, sur les présomptions de faits suivantes: a) Le 17 février 1975, l’appelante conclut une convention avec la compagnie le Chemin de Fer de Matane et du Golfe Inc (ci-après désignée le “Chemin de Fer”); b) Cette convention avait pour objet l’échange de terrains entre l’appelante et le “Chemin de Fer”; c) L’appelante céda à le “Chemin de Fer” des terrains pour une valeur totale de $368,197; d) La juste valeur marchande des terrains cédés par l’appelante n'était pas plus que $152,000 le 31 décembre 1971; e) Parmi les terrains cédés par l’appelante se trouvait le lot 191-7 dont la juste valeur marchande au 31 décembre 1971 était tout au plus $42,600; f) Dans sa déclaration d’impôt (T-2) pour l’année d’imposition 1975 ainsi que dans les états financiers qui étaient joints, l’appelante déclarait un gain en capital imposable de $3,766.60; g) Selon la formule T-2S (6) que l’appelante a jointe à ladite déclaration d’impôt, l’appelante établissait son gain en capital imposable de la façon suivante: Produit de la disposition $368,197.00 Prix de base rajusté 350,663.81 Débours et dépenses 10,000.00 Gain en capital $ 7,533.19 Gain en capital imposable $ 3,766.60 A l’enquête, plusieurs témoins furent entendus. ...

In this regard, submissions made by the applicants’ counsel prior to the interview contained a mention to the effect that “no credibility concerns regarding Laya were raised” – but no explicit request to have her interviewed. [19]   I acknowledge that the Convention on the Rights of the Child, UN GA Res 44/25 (1989) [the Convention], ratified by Canada, provides useful guidance: de Guzman v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FCA 436, [2006] 3 FCR 655. Article 12 of the Convention reads: Article 12 1. States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child. 2. For this purpose, the child shall in particular be provided the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative proceedings affecting the child, either directly, or through a representative or an appropriate body, in a manner consistent with the procedural rules of national law. [20]   I also acknowledge this Court’s jurisprudence to the effect that an officer may interview a child, provided that safeguards appropriate to the child’s age and other relevant circumstances are in place: Jesuthasan v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2002 FCT 872. [21]   Article 12 of the Convention provides that a child’s voice may be heard “through a representative.” ...

(c) His time spent in France was accompanied by a sense of transitoriness and of return. 7 The respondent further invoked Article 10 of the Canada-France Income Tax Convention, dated March 16, 1951 and assented to on June 30, 1951, which is found in the Canada-France Income Tax Convention Act, being chapter 40 of the Statutes of Canada 1951 (First Session), which states as follows: Article 10 I. ... If that be so, it is difficult to envisage what tax relief is accorded by Article VIIIA in the case of professors and teachers that would not otherwise be available in the case of all taxpayers by virtue of the foreign tax credit provisions which are, it is believed, also contemplated by the Tax Convention in question. ... R. 621, as follows: To determine whether a person has ceased to be resident of any particular place, the duration of his previous residence, his connections with that community and his interest in it are circumstances to be considered. 13 As to the application of Article 10 of the Canada-France Income Tax Convention, I note that Article 2, paragraph VI, defines the term “permanent establishment” in a manner which, in my humble opinion, places a limitation on Article 10, if in fact Article 10 applies in the instant case. 14 In answer to a direct question on cross-examination, the appellant stated that he paid no income tax in France. ...