Lawyers’ Professional Indemnity Company v. Canada, 2020 FCA 90 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
narrower construction avoided rendering language redundant
Redundancy/reading in words
Canada v. Colitto, 2020 FCA 70 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
decision that had the effect of reading in words was reversed
Loblaw Financial Holdings Inc. v. Canada, 2020 FCA 79, aff'd 2021 SCC 51 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
error to apply an unexpressed intention
Hancock & Anor v Revenue and Customs, [2019] UKSC 24 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
phrase read out of provision to give effect to intent
Canada (National Revenue) v. Cameco Corporation, 2019 FCA 67 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
CRA’s broad interpretation of s. 231.1(1)(a) would render s. 231.1(1)(d) redundant
Canada (National Revenue) v. Cameco Corporation, 2017 FC 763, aff'd 2019 FCA 67 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
presumption against tautology
Canada (National Revenue) v. Thompson, 2016 SCC 21, [2016] 1 SCR 381 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
presumption against tautology
Caithkin, Inc. v. Canada, 2015 FCA 118 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
condition was redundant if broadly construed
A.Y.S.A. Amateur Youth Soccer Association v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2007 DTC 5527, 2007 SCC 42, [2007] 3 SCR 217 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
Canada v. Remai, 2009 DTC 5188 [at at 6257], 2009 FCA 340 -- attach -- Redundancy/reading in words
provision not to be interpreted such that it can never apply
Pages
