7,644 result(s)
-
326.
John v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2022 FC 1400 - 2022-10-13
Federal Court DecisionsThe UDPS presently holds a power-sharing deal with the Common Front for the Congo (“FCC”), the prior governing party. [...] [12] A court assessing a procedural fairness question is required to ask whether the procedure was fair having regard to all of the circumstances: Canadian Pacific Railway at paragraph 54. [...] [20] Out of an abundance of caution, if I am wrong I will deal with each of the specific arguments below.
-
327.
Carpenter Fishing Corporation v. Canada - 1996-11-14
Federal Court DecisionsBruce Turris: Well, it's a double edged sword, how the appeal process may deal with this. [...] I think it's fair to try and draw a fair line than to draw a hard line. [...] So it's fair to the people that have bought and sold and it's fair to the whole fleet.
-
328.
Villalobos v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1999-05-28
Federal Court DecisionsMEMBER SACHADENA: Well, yes, because what we've been trying to -- to focus on in the -- in the time constraints have been with respect to dealing with testimony that we find repetitious. [...] A full and fair hearing does not mean an opportunity for a person to go on and on and on. [...] [21] I note that under the CRDD Rules, Rule 28(9) provides that in dealing with a motion the Refugee Division "on being satisfied that no injustice is likely to be caused, may dispose of a motion without a hearing".
-
329.
Hawco v. Canada (Attorney General) - 1998-06-12
Federal Court DecisionsSubsequently, on December 18, 1992, the Base Commander completed additional observations dealing principally with the applicant's objections to the notice of intent that he be released. [...] [26] The respondent submits that the standards of procedural fairness were met in this case. [...] [37] Further, I find that there has been no breach of the standards of procedural fairness in this matter.
-
330.
Dmitrienko v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2023 FC 1678 - 2023-12-12
Federal Court DecisionsThe Applicant asserts VAC erroneously relied on the chapter dealing with hypertension and vascular impairment (Table 13), as opposed to that dealing with cardiorespiratory impairment (Table 12). [...] Did the Reconsideration Panel breach the duty of procedural fairness? [...] [41] Thus, while the Applicant seeks to make a procedural fairness argument, the Respondent rightly points out that the Applicant’s arguments do not deal with procedure.
-
331.
Talbot v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2012 FC 972 - 2012-08-07
Federal Court DecisionsIn addition, under subsection 162(2) of the Act, the Board is to deal with all proceedings as quickly as the circumstances and the considerations of fairness and natural justice permit. [...] This provision requires boards to deal with all proceedings as quickly as the circumstances and the considerations of fairness and natural justice permit. [...] 162.(2) Each Division shall deal with all proceedings before it as informally and quickly as the circumstances and the considerations of fairness and natural justice permit.
-
332.
Francis v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2012 FC 1141 - 2012-10-24
Federal Court Decisions1) Did the RPD breach procedural fairness by not communicating to the Applicant the [...] A new panel will be able to deal with all relevant issues including the ones mentioned above. [...] 2. The matter is referred to a new panel in order to deal with all the issues; and
-
333.
Soullière v. Canada (Blood Services) - 2017 FC 689 - 2017-07-17
Federal Court DecisionsThe Commission should deal with the complaint because it is not frivolous. [...] breaching procedural fairness by i. relying on an inadequate investigation, and [...] She asserts this does not meet the standard of thoroughness required for procedural fairness.
-
334.
Richter v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2008 FC 806 - 2008-06-26
Federal Court DecisionsAt trial, her defence was that she had been unwittingly drawn into the illegal dealings of her husband, that she had believed the weapons were deactivated and that she was not familiar with firearm mechanics. [...] Issues of procedural fairness, however, are subject to an assessment of whether the procedure was fair; if that duty is found to have been breached, the decision will be vacated. [...] 1. Is there a greater duty of fairness required of immigration officers preparing a section 44(1) report and the Minister in referring the report when dealing with persons in custody?
-
335.
Forrest v. Canada (Solicitor General) - 1998-10-13
Federal Court DecisionsIn dealing with that requested relief, the issues that are addressed in these reasons are: [...] In holding that there was no breach of procedural fairness, the Québec Court of Appeal commented that [...] The standards by which procedural fairness is measured are not immutable.
-
336.
Stagg v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2019 FC 630 - 2019-05-09
Federal Court DecisionsIt also argues that the decision was not made in a procedurally fair manner. [...] The decision challenged deals with the provision of services to members of First Nations. [...] It is easier to deal first with the complaints regarding procedural fairness.
-
337.
Apolinario v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2016 FC 1287 - 2016-11-22
Federal Court DecisionsA. Procedural Fairness (1) Was the referral made by the Minister’s Delegate procedurally fair? [...] The first four of those deal with the scope of discretion of an officer or delegate. [...] The last two of the six deal with the duty of fairness owed by each of an officer and delegate in considering whether to prepare a report or make a referral.
-
338.
Tariku v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2007 FC 474 - 2007-05-04
Federal Court Decisions[2] This application raises several issues but it is enough to deal with only one in order to dispose of this application for judicial review: did the Board breach the principles of procedural fairness in relying on undisclosed extrinsic evidence that was not part of the record at the hearing? [...] The question is whether the applicant had the opportunity of dealing with the evidence. [...] [...] I find that the applicant did not have the opportunity to deal with the evidence (Dasent, above).
-
339.
Mervilus v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 1206 - 2004-09-02
Federal Court Decisions(c) He is the father of two children (in 1997; now three in 2004), for whom he shows a great deal of affection. [...] He had not been diligent in his dealings with his counsel. The member determined that the applicant's integration in Canada was unsatisfactory. [...] He was obviously absolutely ill-equipped to deal with the issue of the appeal which was decided, apparently without his awareness of it.
-
340.
Shoan v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FC 476 - 2018-05-07
Federal Court Decisions[82] In the present application, I am only looking at the possible need for a new process – and a meeting in particular – to deal fairly and reasonably with the two separate and distinct grounds cited in the May 4, 2017 Decision. [...] [137] In my view, then, the GIC’s process for dealing with the May 4, 2017 termination was not procedurally unfair on this basis. [...] [160] This affidavit and exhibits deal with the Privacy Act complaint.
-
341.
Mangat v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2016 FC 907 - 2016-08-09
Federal Court Decisions10. Regarding the 2009 peace bond, the Applicant said “This is the truth and I can’t sugar coat it.” The Applicant attended counselling services as a result, which helped him gain insight into the matters he was dealing with; [...] Moreover, both the purpose of the Act and the nature of the question deal with protecting the public by preventing acts of unlawful interference in civil aviation. [...] Moreover, both the purpose of the Act and the nature of the question deal with protecting the public by preventing acts of unlawful interference in civil aviation.
-
342.
Abbas-Nejad v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2013 FC 318 - 2013-03-27
Federal Court DecisionsIn my view, given the failure of the IAD to deal with it, its negative conclusion cannot be considered reasonable. [...] Whether the IAD proceeded fairly or unreasonably in respect of her father’s application will have no effect on that application. [...] In particular, the fairness issue is a novel one, so far as I am aware, and deciding it would require the Court to set a precedent.
-
343.
Democracy Watch v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FC 1290 - 2018-12-19
Federal Court DecisionsI note here that the Respondent deals with justiciability both in the context of standing and as a stand-alone issue. [...] Another question is whether the duty of procedural fairness applies to the GIC appointment decision and, if so, the content of any duty of procedural fairness owed to the Applicant in these circumstances. [...] [100] The Applicant also submits that the duty of consultation is properly regarded as an aspect of procedural fairness, thus permitting the Court to rely on the common law Baker factors to determine the content of that duty of fairness.
-
344.
MacFarlane v. Day & Ross Inc. - 2010 FC 556 - 2010-05-26
Federal Court DecisionsThis again raises issues pertaining to natural justice and procedural fairness. [...] This procedural fairness element is reviewed as a question of law. No deference is due. [...] In my view, the Applicant’s right to a fair hearing and process was not violated.
-
345.
54039 Newfoundland and Labrador Limited (George Street Association) v. St. John's Port Authority - 2011 FC 740 - 2011-06-21
Federal Court DecisionsThe SJPA’s letters patent provide that the SJPA must ensure that leases not be for less than fair market value. [...] Since such an application is meant to be dealt with summarily, it is ordinarily more proper to deal with any objection to the application in the context of the hearing on the merits, if only because a full grasp of the facts and of the context will often be necessary to deal with the objection. [...] [56] As a consequence, I am satisfied that the Court does not have jurisdiction to deal with this application for judicial review.
-
346.
Best v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2011 FC 71 - 2011-01-20
Federal Court DecisionsFollowing submissions on the request to amend from both parties, the Commission agreed to deal with the amended complaint. [...] [14] The applicant now criticizes the Commission for having breached procedural fairness and for having made an unreasonable decision by refusing to deal with the complaint in question. [...] [18] The applicant’s claim that the Commission violated her right to procedural fairness must fail.
-
347.
Weatherill v. Canada (Attorney General) - 1999-05-28
Federal Court DecisionsOthers deal with facts that are so uncontroversial as to provide no substantive basis for objection. [...] The issue has been discussed extensively in cases dealing with the right of a person charged with an offence to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal as required by section 11(d) of the Charter. [...] Procedural fairness [90] The applicant argues that he was denied procedural fairness.
-
348.
Pizarro Gutierrez v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2013 FC 623 - 2013-06-10
Federal Court Decisions[17] The applicant raised a number of issues, all of which deal with compliance with the rules of procedural fairness without really challenging the officer’s findings that he was a member of organizations described in paragraphs 34(1)(a)(b) and (c) of the IRPA or that he himself had engaged in acts of terrorism. [...] [23] Questions of procedural fairness must be assessed on a standard of correctness. [...] Again, procedural fairness did not require proceeding in that fashion in the circumstances.
-
349.
Kohlenberg v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2017 FC 414 - 2017-04-27
Federal Court Decisions[12] The determinative issue in this case is procedural fairness. The Applicant alleges that he was denied procedural fairness at all three levels of the grievance procedure. [...] I will deal with each objection separately. De novo issue [72] On the de novo issue, I have already found that a second-level grievance officer conducts a procedurally fair de novo hearing notwithstanding she or he has the first-level decision for review in the material in the docket or file. [...] The Federal Court is not simply another step in the grievance procedure, because while grievance officers deal with the merits of a case, this Court normally does not.
-
350.
Canada Post Corporation v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2007 FC 1362 - 2007-12-21
Federal Court DecisionsDid the appeals officer breach the duty of fairness by failing to provide Canada Post with an opportunity to deal with two issues raised in his decision? [...] All the other matters, then, you’re just going to have to deal with somewhere else.” [...] Just go ahead and if there’s a problem with it that deals with fairness, then Mr. Bird will raise it.”