7,645 result(s)
-
901.
Dee v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1998-12-04
Federal Court DecisionsThat is very basic fairness, which is the cornerstone of our judicial system. [...] I would appreciate if you would comment on what threshold we could expect from a deemed convention refugee to deal with outstanding charges. [...] But the question which, in fairness, the Court asks in its discretion in this matter is, why in the world should Mr. Dee rely on that promise?
-
902.
Vandenberg v. Canada (Attorney General) - 1997-05-27
Federal Court DecisionsI direct that the facts to be considered on this rehearing are those that exist -- and, indeed, I think it is only fair to say -- at the time of the rehearing. [...] That deals with Mr. Joseph Vandenberg. MR. RENOUF: I wonder if I could make one further application with respect to Mr. Joseph Vandenberg, my Lord. [...] Yes, and that section, so we are dealing with a decision-maker on the request for a permit?
-
903.
Mediatube Corp. v. Bell Canada - 2016 FC 1066 - 2016-09-21
Federal Court DecisionsThough Justice Phelan was not dealing with the issue of discovery answers that had been corrected, he stated that the basic principle of Rule 289 is “to ensure that the answers to questions fairly reflect the true response given.” [...] [...] to ensure that evidence from a transcript of examination for discovery which is read in as evidence at trial is placed in proper context so that it is seen and read fairly, without prejudice to another party that might arise if only a portion of the content relevant at [sic] to a fair understanding of the evidence [...] [10] However, as stated above, Justice Phelan was not dealing with the issue of discovery answers that had been corrected.
-
904.
Brauer v. Canada - 2020 FC 828 - 2020-08-17
Federal Court DecisionsThe 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 conducted in a fair and efficient manner. [...] It would also not be possible for the Court to deal with a case based on the absence of material facts, and in view of the nature of the wrongs that are alleged.
-
905.
Mandi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2014 FC 257 - 2014-03-17
Federal Court Decisionsb. Did the Officer make findings without giving the Applicant a fair opportunity to respond? [...] c. Did the Officer breach a duty of procedural fairness by making findings without giving the applicant a fair opportunity to respond? [...] [32] The Applicant is clearly suffering from Lupus and will require on-going medical treatment to deal with that situation.
-
906.
Rafizadeh v. Toronto Dominion Bank - 2013 FC 781 - 2013-07-15
Federal Court DecisionsIn the course of dealing with what he perceived to be his whistle blowing reports, the Applicant was called in by TD Bank officials, who charged him with irregularities and dismissed him. [...] I have a great deal of sympathy for the complainant and his circumstances. [...] He was cautioned by me that my task was to deal with the matter on the basis of the evidence in the record before the Court, and that he could not introduce or rely upon new evidence.
-
907.
Jiang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2010 FC 580 - 2010-05-27
Federal Court Decisionsc. Did the immigration officer breach his duty of procedural fairness by relying on extrinsic evidence? [...] C. Procedural Fairness [27] The Applicants submitted that the officer breached procedural fairness by relying on extrinsic documentary evidence without giving them an opportunity to respond. [...] It is true that this exact same wording exists in the Report in the section dealing with freedom of religion and anti-Semitic acts.
-
908.
Vasquez v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2005 FC 91 - 2005-01-20
Federal Court Decisions1. did the Officer breach procedural fairness by not giving the Applicants the opportunity to review the PRRA determination and to provide comments before she rendered the H & C Decision? [...] I am of the view, again, on the facts of this matter, that the principles regarding the duty of fairness that were enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada, in Baker, supra, do not extend that far. [...] [50] The Applicants are asking the Court to isolate the word "minimal" as it is used in that section of their H & C application dealing with "Supportive and Non-supportive Considerations."
-
909.
Wellcome Foundation Limited v. Apotex Inc. - 1998-08-26
Federal Court Decisions[9] I deal with each of the major issues in turn, after setting out the matters agreed by the parties. [...] The injunction ordered by that paragraph precluded the defendant from dealing in any way with infringing TMP, and from selling or dealing with tablets containing infringing TMP. [...] It reflects fairly in my opinion, reasonable costs of borrowing equivalent funds if Apotex had borrowed money in place of the profits here in issue had those not been earned.
-
910.
Asare v. Canada (National Revenue) - 2022 FC 1676 - 2022-12-05
Federal Court DecisionsFurther, administrative tribunals may control their own procedures so long as they are procedurally fair. [...] One deals with the appropriateness of the penalties in light of the conduct of the taxpayer in making a return, the other with exceptional circumstances which may justify the cancellation of the penalties on fairness considerations. [...] I will, however, briefly deal with the Applicant’s submissions in that regard.
-
911.
Merck & Co. Inc. v. Apotex inc. - 2008 FC 1121 - 2008-10-30
Federal Court DecisionsHowever, waiver may also occur in the absence of an intention to waive, where fairness and consistency so require. [...] The law then says that in fairness and consistency it must be entirely waived. [...] [19] I need not deal with the other ground of appeal put forward by Apotex.
-
912.
Guille v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2007 FC 1059 - 2007-10-16
Federal Court Decisions41. (1) Subject to section 40, the Commission shall deal with any complaint filed with it unless in respect of that complaint it appears to the Commission that [...] The rule of procedural fairness requires that a complainant know the substance of the case against him or her. [...] [33] The provision is an exception to the Commission’s first obligation – to deal with any complaint filed.
-
913.
Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation v. Canada (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development) - 2006 FC 721 - 2006-06-08
Federal Court Decisions[2] The Band has taken the position that Canada breached its fiduciary obligations to it in failing to achieve fair and reasonable compensation. [...] Indeed, a fairly arguable case anticipates that there may well be a fairly arguable defence. [...] Canada has a fairly arguable case that it breached no fiduciary duty in its dealings with Calgary Power.
-
914.
Mahjoub (Re) - 2013 FC 1096 - 2013-10-25
Federal Court Decisions(1) give citizens fair notice of the consequences of their conduct, and [...] In fact, R. v. Garofoli, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1421 [Garofoli], deals with this issue in a more pertinent way than Wilson at pages 1448 and 1449: [...] [162] While Blood Tribe confirms that solicitor-client privilege is a substantive right that is an integral component of the right to a fair trial under section 7 of the Charter that may only be infringed when absolutely necessary, it does not deal with a situation involving national security.
-
915.
Terreault v. Cowansville Penitentiary - 2003 FC 1529 - 2003-12-31
Federal Court Decisions3. There is an overall duty to act fairly by ensuring that the inquiry is carried out in a fair manner and with due regard to natural justice. [...] Infringements of procedural fairness [20] I feel that there was clearly an infringement of procedural fairness. [...] Subsection 30(1) of the Regulations deals with procedural fairness as the subsection describes a procedure that is to be followed, it is contained in a section titled "Hearings of Disciplinary Offences" and it is surrounded by provisions which all deal with procedure to be followed leading up to or during the hearing.
-
916.
Alibey v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2004 FC 305 - 2004-03-02
Federal Court Decisions[58] In Lau, supra, Pinard J. placed a great deal of emphasis upon the need for an "individualized assessment in evaluating medical inadmissibility." [...] [77] The Applicant's final issue is that the medical officer breached her duty of fairness. [...] It must be remembered however that the content of the duty of fairness is variable and contextual.
-
917.
Keith v. Canada (Correctional Service) - 2011 FC 690 - 2011-06-14
Federal Court DecisionsThe CHRC was simply dealing with the question whether a hearing into Dr. Keith’s complaint was warranted. [...] Further, it acted fairly in relying on an investigation into Dr. Keith’s complaint that was, in the circumstances, sufficiently thorough. [...] Commission to deal with complaint 41. (1) Subject to section 40, the Commission shall deal with any complaint filed with it unless in respect of that complaint it appears to the Commission that
-
918.
Amable v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 702 - 2021-07-02
Federal Court DecisionsB. Applicant’s submissions in response to the first procedural fairness letter [...] E. Applicant’s submissions in response to the second procedural fairness letter [...] • - In early 2013, Brice asked her if she wanted to participate in his business dealings.
-
919.
Larivière v. Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport Authority - 1998-03-06
Federal Court Decisions[34] It is trite law that the precise requirements of fairness vary with the circumstances of the particular case. [...] [36] I also agree with counsel that a more formalized system for dealing with airside vehicle operation infractions, such as that used at Toronto, Pearson Airport, has much to commend it. [...] The requirements of procedural fairness can be met even absent a structured "hearing" (Knight, supra).
-
920.
Gallardo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 441 - 2021-05-13
Federal Court DecisionsThis, Mr. Gallardo says, was wrong and a denial of his right to a fair hearing. [...] [11] The Chairperson Guideline 6 dealing with scheduling and adjournments deals explicitly with the issue of the unavailability of counsel. [...] [18] An appeal body cannot rectify a breach of procedural fairness by wrongly declaring that the process was fair or that, had the correct ruling been made, it was inevitable that an adjournment would have been refused.
-
921.
John v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2010 FC 1088 - 2010-11-04
Federal Court DecisionsContrary to the applicant’s claim, the officer did cite explicitly the evidence on the problems police face in dealing with domestic abuse. [...] Failure to disclose relevant documents is an issue of procedural fairness (see Allou v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 2009 FC 1025 at paragraph 18). [...] [36] I will now deal with two issues raised by the applicant that deal with fairness of the process.
-
922.
Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline Ltd. Partnership v. Elliott - 2004 FC 553 - 2004-04-13
Federal Court Decisions(a) if an Arbitration Committee exists to deal with the matter referred to in the notice, forthwith serve the notice on that Committee; or [...] (b) if no Arbitration Committee exists to deal with the matter, forthwith appoint an Arbitration Committee and serve the notice on that Committee. [...] [43] Since the applicant has been successful, I need not deal with the issue of procedural fairness.
-
923.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Canada (Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials) - 2007 FC 766 - 2007-07-24
Federal Court Decisions• [39] Consequently, I will apply the Ribic framework, but will attempt to contextualize it given the particularities giving rise to this application, namely that we are dealing with a public inquiry. [...] For if there has been harsh or improper conduct in the dealings of the executive with the citizen, it ought to be revealed. [...] This supports the conclusion that while “danger to the security of Canada” must be given a fair, large and liberal interpretation, it nevertheless demands proof of a potentially serious threat.
-
924.
Mikail v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2011 FC 674 - 2011-06-28
Federal Court DecisionsThe Court indicated during the hearing that it would deal with the Motion to intervene with the materials placed before the Court. [...] As an example, blatant examples of discrimination or breaches of procedural fairness would surely be reviewable. [...] Indeed, the case of Omary, above, would introduce such a scenario, as would the review of SIRC’s investigations under procedural fairness rules.
-
925.
Schmidt v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2011 FC 356 - 2011-03-23
Federal Court Decisions[15] The parties to this application agree that breaches of procedural fairness surrounding an administrative decision may, in some cases, be overcome by a fair process of appellate review. [...] [27] Captain Schmidt argues that the CDS ought to have bifurcated the grievance process to deal first with the issue of fairness and then to have invited further submissions and evidence on matters of substance. [...] The problem with this argument is that Captain Schmidt did not ask the CDS to adopt such an approach and the CDS made it abundantly clear that he intended to deal with both issues at once.