7,644 result(s)
-
626.
Subotic v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 1203 - 2004-09-01
Federal Court DecisionsDid the Board deny the applicants procedural fairness when it did not allow the male applicant to testify? [...] However, she relies on Bhatti v. Canada (Secretary of State) (1994), 84 F.T.R. 145, a decision which deals with the concept of indirect persecution. [...] [20] In conclusion, it is evident that Mrs. Subotic has been through a great deal of trauma in Bosnia-Herzegovina and that she has the care and support of her son and daughter here in Canada.
-
627.
Dela Rea Manalang v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2007 FC 1368 - 2007-12-28
Federal Court Decisions(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. [...] 57. In the absence of a provision in these Rules dealing with a matter raised during an appeal, the Division may do whatever is necessary to deal with the matter. [...] [106] In my view, the IAD fairly assessed the evidence before it relative to humanitarian and compassionate grounds.
-
628.
Zhao-Jie v. TD Waterhouse Canada Inc. - 2024 FC 261 - 2024-02-16
Federal Court DecisionsThe Claim alleges the plaintiff is “the Plenipotentiary of the victim Chen Zhe to deal with the matter with TD from Feb. 2, 2010” (paragraph 2), with “TD” referring to the defendant, TD Waterhouse Canada Inc. (paragraph 1). [...] The reason for this is simple – it is not fair to a defendant to have to respond to claims that are not explained in sufficient detail for them to understand what the claim is based on, or to have to deal with claims based on unsupported assumptions or speculation. [...] Neither is it fair to the Court that will have to ensure that the hearing is done in a fair and efficient manner.
-
629.
Universal Sales Limited v. Edinburgh Assurance Co. Ltd. - 2009 FC 150 - 2009-02-12
Federal Court Decisions[9] This motion deals with the Defendants’ refusal to produce documents or answer discovery questions related to when they determined there was no coverage. [...] In the circumstances, the concern of “completion and fairness” as referred to By Justice O’Driscoll in Stevenson v. Reimer, [1993] O.J. No. 2800, is of no moment. [...] 2. Waiver of solicitor-client privilege may occur in the absence of an intention to waive, where fairness and consistency so require.
-
630.
Norwegian v. Canada (Minister of Environment) - 2005 FC 374 - 2005-03-15
Federal Court DecisionsThese references to procedure and procedural fairness as a means of extending the production of documents could be relevant in the present instance, and logically lead to the Friends of the West Country case, to which I will shortly return. [...] [13] All of the exceptions to the general rule, that it is the material which was before the tribunal that is produceable, while fairly narrow, are recognized as existing exceptions, including procedural matters. [...] The production requested, set out in the notice of application, is fairly specific.
-
631.
Gill v. Canada - 2002 FCT 973 - 2002-09-12
Federal Court DecisionsThe motion gives rise to several points which, while fairly basic, may be disposed of summarily. [...] These two paragraphs are fundamental to the claim; in passing I also decline to strike them out, as contended by the Defendant, as tending to delay a fair trial. [...] Paragraph 3 is said not to display a reasonable cause of action, to be scandalous and vexatious, to be abusive and to be such as it will delay a fair trail.
-
632.
Duiker v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2023 FC 701 - 2023-05-19
Federal Court DecisionsAs a result, this judgment and reasons will deal with the general nature of the facts and issues, consistent with the various Orders. [...] [144] It is important to note that the right to refuse to work is not contingent on an employee having attempted to deal with OHS issues through means other than a work refusal. [...] While the precise content of the duty of fairness will vary depending on the circumstances, the decision-maker’s process must always be fair (Baker at para 22).
-
633.
Calixte v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 55 - 2021-01-14
Federal Court DecisionsA. Was there a breach of procedural fairness? B. Was the RAD’s decision reasonable? [...] The principal applicant had a great deal of difficulty, so much so that the RPD agreed to adjourn the hearing because she was not feeling well. [...] [25] For all of these reasons, I am not satisfied that there was a breach of procedural fairness.
-
634.
Krishnan v. Royal Bank of Canada - 2005 FC 376 - 2005-03-16
Federal Court DecisionsThe ground would be "severely out of time and the CHRC may decide not to deal with it". [...] Rather, I am required to evaluate whether procedural fairness has been afforded by the tribunal. [...] Rather, he asks me to quash a decision of the CHRC not to deal with his new complaint of sexual orientation as a ground of discrimination.
-
635.
Kim v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 122 - 2015-08-19
Federal Court DecisionsThe material portion of the Fairness Letter reads as follows: Dear Applicant, [...] [17] Section 36(3)(c) of the IRPA deals with deemed rehabilitation and it provides as follows: [...] The provisions dealing with those persons convicted outside Canada provide as follows:
-
636.
Lessard-Gauvin v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2020 FC 730 - 2020-06-30
Federal Court DecisionsAlthough Hospira did not deal directly with the applicable test in these situations, the case law does establish that the test to be applied to such errors is the same as that applicable to errors of law, and that no deference is owed to prothonotaries on questions of procedural fairness (Housen at paras 8–9; G.D. Searle [...] Issues of procedural fairness and the duty to act fairly are not concerned with the merits or content of a decision rendered, but rather the process followed. [...] I will deal with them in that order. [51] After carefully reviewing the Prothonotary’s Orders, reading the records and analyzing the written and oral submissions of the parties, I conclude that Mr. Lessard-Gauvin has not demonstrated that the Orders contain an error of law, a palpable and overriding error of fact or mixed
-
637.
Sawridge Band v. Canada - 2005 FC 607 - 2005-05-03
Federal Court Decisions[105] This synopsis of what has led to the present motion shows that what the Court is asked to deal with is confined to a fairly narrow range of procedural matters related to the pre-trial period. [...] He [Russell J.] made a number of rulings on that day dealing with will-says and the fairness of treatment between the parties. [...] 187. Mr. Healey tried to remind the Court of its obligations to have regard for the Plaintiffs' rights and how the Plaintiffs have been fair in their dealing with the opposite side.
-
638.
Soullière v. Canada (Health) - 2017 FC 686 - 2017-07-17
Federal Court Decisions(1) Was the Commission’s Decision procedurally fair? [18] In my view, the Commission made no procedural error in coming to its decision. [...] [28] Nor do I accept Ms. Soullière’s contention that since CBS policies and procedures are essentially mandatory once approved, and may affect HC approval for future license eligibility, HC is necessarily a party to the discrimination, even without any direct dealings with Ms. Dewan. [...] [43] This Court has dismissed the judicial review in the companion matter T-690-15 on the basis of that decision of the Commission being reasonable and procedurally fair.
-
639.
Cooper v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2001 FCT 1329 - 2001-12-04
Federal Court Decisions[7] Section 120.1 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (the "Act") deals with calculation of parole eligibility dates where additional consecutive sentences are imposed. [...] Section 120.2 deals with calculation of parole eligibility where additional concurrent sentences are imposed. [...] Equity encompassing the notions of fairness, justice and predictability.
-
640.
Watson v. Canada - 2003 FC 1377 - 2003-11-21
Federal Court DecisionsHe observed that Mr. Watson had gained a fair amount of distance on him. [...] Mr. Watson then stopped his vehicle in the middle of the fairly narrow road. [...] While that is a generalization, it is a fairly universal concept, except in particular circumstances.
-
641.
Cerescorp Company v. Marshall - 2011 FC 468 - 2011-04-15
Federal Court DecisionsIntervention is warranted only where it is clear that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter before it. [...] If the Commission wanted to make a determination on this issue on all the evidence before it, including the submissions from Cerescorp, then procedural fairness required that the Commission specifically deal with the issues raised in the submissions of Cerescorp. [...] 3. The aspect of the Decision that deals with possible systemic discrimination against women in the promotion process is remitted to the Commission for investigation by a different investigator acting in a procedurally fair manner and subsequent re-determination by the Commission; and
-
642.
Spidel v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2012 FC 958 - 2012-07-31
Federal Court Decisions[57] The Report went on to observe that “[t]he system has been ineffective in dealing with the chronic backlog of cases. [...] Tellingly, he says, the chapter of the manual dealing with the CSC grievance process included the phrase “Why Bother? [...] This new evidence also does not go to a question of either procedural fairness or jurisdiction.
-
643.
League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada v. Canada - 2009 FC 647 - 2009-06-19
Federal Court DecisionsMoreover, it is inappropriate to put a great deal of emphasis on Mr. Odynsky’s personal interest in maintaining citizenship in order to maintain family ties. [...] Duty of Fairness [41] B’nai Brith argues that the GIC owed it a duty of fairness, at least to the extent of providing reasons for its decision. [...] At the centre of the fairness analysis was said to be a consideration of whether “those whose interests were affected had a meaningful opportunity to present their case fully and fairly”.
-
644.
Howlader v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 817 - 2005-06-14
Federal Court DecisionsWe are, therefore, facing a clear breach of procedural fairness which, given the importance and the relevancy of the documents appended to the motion, is sufficient for me to allow the application for judicial review and send the matter back to be reconsidered by a differently constituted panel of the Board. [...] This means that the RPD had to deal with the applicant's request. It could simply mention in its decision that, having reviewed the letter, it decided not to consider the evidence because of factors listed in Rule 37(3) or it could accept to consider the new evidence and deal with it in its decision. [...] The RPD simply failed to deal with this matter. A breach of procedural fairness can only be overlooked if there is no doubt that it had no material effect on the decision.
-
645.
Fischer v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2013 FC 861 - 2013-08-12
Federal Court Decisions[6] Sections 23, 24 and 27 of the CCRA deal with the collection and communication of relevant information: [...] However, the applicant generally questions the fairness of the whole grievance process. [...] [22] Issues of procedural fairness in the context of judicial review of decisions made in the course of the CSC offender grievance process, as well as issues dealing with the interpretation of legislation, are generally dealt with under the correctness standard of review: Kim v Canada (AG), 2012 FC 870 at para 32 [Kim];
-
646.
Persaud v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2011 FC 31 - 2011-01-12
Federal Court Decisions[11] The essential issue in this case is how the Appeal Division is to deal with a decision of the Immigration Division once a finding has been made that a principle of natural justice had not been observed. [...] [13] In the present circumstances we are dealing with section 67(1)(b) which provides that, to allow an appeal, the Appeal Division must find that a principle of natural justice has not been observed. [...] In Administrative Law (6th ed. 1988), at p. 535, Professor Wade discusses the notion that fair procedure should come first, and that the demerits of bad cases should not ordinarily lead courts to ignore breaches of natural justice or fairness.
-
647.
Armoyan v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2004 FC 730 - 2004-05-19
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, after hearing this matter, it became clear that the only issue is whether the Commission erred or breached Mr. Armoyan's right to procedural fairness by not providing sufficient reasons for its decision. [...] This provision deals solely with a decision at the screening stage that the Commission will not deal with the complaint. [...] In the result, I conclude that the Commission did not fail to fulfil the duty of fairness incumbent on it by giving insufficient reasons.
-
648.
Gauthier v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2017 FC 697 - 2017-07-18
Federal Court DecisionsI dismissed the Applicant’s motion at the outset of the hearing because the new evidence was not before the Commission when it made its decision and it did not relate to a breach of procedural fairness or natural justice by the Commission in rendering its decision. [...] In light of these findings, the Respondent says the Commission reasonably adopted the Section 40/41 Report’s recommendation to not deal with the complaint. [...] In my view, the Commission thoroughly reviewed the factors presented in this case in a fair and impartial manner.
-
649.
Jamshidi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2024 FC 627 - 2024-04-24
Federal Court Decisions[8] Instead, I dismiss the Applicant’s application as I find the Decision reasonable and I find no breach of procedural fairness. [...] [56] Whether or not the Court shall develop further protocols and rules to deal with non-appearances as a systemic issue is not for me to decide. [...] B. The Officer did not breach the duty of procedural fairness [58] The Applicant appears to raise three procedural fairness arguments.
-
650.
Island Timberlands LP v. Canada (Foreign Affairs and International Trade) - 2008 FC 1380 - 2008-12-17
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, if the offer is considered not to be “fair”, an export permit is generally granted. [...] Knowing that EXCOL was not currently capable of dealing with this application, we forwarded our application on a form 1718. [...] As a result, the strategy on how to deal with Island Timberlands’ application was taken up the line of decision-making to the Director General in the Minister’s office.