Advanced Search

Mukhal v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2020 FC 868 - 2020-08-31

It was also clear that any concern regarding the local police stemmed primarily from its willingness to aid and abet Mr. Singh in his illicit dealings.   [...]  C. Was there a veiled credibility finding creating a new issue for which procedural fairness was not respected, and was there an improper requirement for corroborative evidence?

Mudjatik Thyssen Mining Joint Venture v. Billette - 2020 FC 255 - 2020-02-14

In addition, supervisors will receive training to enable them to fairly exercise their authority to make “reasonable suspicion” determinations.   [...]  I note that the Cameco Standard regarding Alcohol and Substance for Contractors and Other Non-Cameco Personnel includes a provision dealing with the revocation and restoration of site access, and makes it clear that this decision is to be made by Cameco, upon verification that all necessary steps have been taken by the

Lawrence v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2019 FC 1248 - 2019-10-02

being processed under the current system prior to the amendments.” In his view, the purpose of the transitional provisions is to subject new applicants to the new laws once they are in force, while not affecting prior existing applicants already in the system and that this is in line with “common sense” and “fairness”.   [...]  [62] This transitional provision deals with amendments (under section 9 of the FRFCA) to subsection 25(1) of the IRPA, regarding requests for an exemption on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.

Bradwick Property Management Services Inc. v. Canada (National Revenue) - 2019 FC 289 - 2019-03-11

Alternatively, if this allegation is limited to the issues concerning redactions already identified, it is addressed below in dealing with those issues.   [...]  c) contenant des renseignements dont la divulgation risquerait vraisemblablement de nuire aux activités destinées à faire respecter les lois fédérales ou provinciales ou au déroulement d’enquêtes licites, notamment :

Okemow-Clark v. Lucky Man Cree First Nation - 2008 FC 888 - 2008-07-18

[28] The respondent Lucky Man Cree Nation further submits that a judicial review can only be made to deal with an administrative decision of a federal board or tribunal.   [...]  a) après avoir donné un avis convenable de son intention de ce faire, fixer les règles d’appartenance à ses effectifs;

3430901 Canada Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Industry) - 1999-11-17

[56] Dealing with the last point first, it seems to me that a discussion of policy options that concludes with a recommendation is a "recommendation" within the meaning of paragraph 21(1)(a), but "advice" is a much broader concept.   [...]  [90] These documents disclose that careful consideration was given to questions of the security and fairness of the deliberative process.

Fraser v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2021 FC 821 - 2021-08-04

Canada relies on the ATIA s. 53(1) that deals with s. 41 review applications.   [...]  (f) correctional decisions are made in a forthright and fair manner, with access by the offender to an effective grievance procedure;   [...]  (e) offenders are provided with relevant information, reasons for decisions and access to the review of decisions in order to ensure a fair and understandable conditional release process.

Deeproot Green Infrastructure, LLC v. Greenblue Urban North America Inc. - 2021 FC 501 - 2021-07-16

The public is entitled to rely on the words used provided the words used are interpreted fairly and knowledgeably.   [...]  The 599 Patent claim 1 eliminates the height requirement and reduces the language to only deal with a single structural cell rather than a plurality of horizontal or vertical cells.   [...]  [40] if the claims read fairly on what has been disclosed and illustrated in the specification and drawing,..., they are not wider than the invention...

Vidéotron Ltée v. Konek Technologies Inc. - 2023 FC 741 - 2023-05-26

In all fairness, the plaintiffs would not be able to seek an injunction if the alleged copyright infringement stemmed from their refusal to grant such a licence.   [...]  [107] There is little case law dealing with the application of subsection 38.1(3) to electronic means of communication, and there are no decisions that support a requirement of simultaneity.   [...]  a) faire une déclaration fausse ou trompeuse tendant à discréditer l’entreprise, les produits ou les services d’un concurrent;

Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society v. Copps - 2001 FCT 1123 - 2001-10-16

The leading case dealing with sections 15 and 16 of the Act [the "scoping" authority] is a decision of this Court in Friends of the West Country Association v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans).   [...]  This is not an unusual situation as national policy guidelines and regulatory statutes seldom are formed to deal with circumstances unique to a specific location.   [...]  (2) Les terres domaniales situées dans un parc sur lesquelles des droits réels ou intérêts ont été concédés en vertu du présent article continuent à faire partie du parc et, dès qu'elles cessent de servir aux fins visées par la concession, ces terres -- ou les droits réels ou intérêts concédés sur elles -- retournent à la

Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2014 FC 152 - 2013-12-04

[...] 48. [...] In Catnic, as in the earlier case law, the scope of the monopoly remains a function of the written claims but, as before, flexibility and fairness is achieved by differentiating the essential features ("the pith and marrow") from the unessential, based on a knowledgeable reading of the whole specification   [...]  The Court was dealing with a patent directed to dosages and made it clear that even if a patent claim could be construed so as to include a certain dosage that did not mean that the claim would satisfy the requirements of the Regulations:

Boroumand v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2007 FC 1219 - 2007-11-21

It is also objectively documented that Iran has strict policies with respect to drug-related offences and that the judiciary has had a “free hand” to deal with drug traffickers.   [...]   reasons for decision as a whole were simply inadequate given the significance of the decision to the Applicant, where the standard of review would be correctness given that the adequacy of reasons is a matter of fairness or natural justice[6], I am satisfied that the decision under review was made in reviewable error.

Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of Health) - 2004 FC 236 - 2004-02-16

[16] Various subsequent subsections deal with the content of the report, how sampling is to take place, methods and conditions for the collection of data and when the report is to be submitted.   [...]  ¶ 22 I also rely upon s. 10 of the Interpretation Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 219, which provides that every Act "shall be deemed to be remedial" and directs that every Act shall "receive such fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation as will best ensure the attainment of the object of the Act according to its true