22 result(s)
-
1.
Canadian Transit Company v. Canada (Transport) - 2011 FC 515 - 2011-05-04
Federal Court DecisionsBuilding a second span for the existing Ambassador Bridge would also require the expansion of the existing Windsor local roads leading to the Ambassador Bridge . [...] . . . On the other hand, the plaza expansion at the foot of the Ambassador Bridge (CT-1) associated with twinning of the Ambassador Bridge , did not perform well. [...] to the proposed structures and the existing Ambassador Bridge. The Ambassador Bridge occupies the lowest three
-
2.
Canadian Transit Company v. Canada (Transport) - 2011 FC 517 - 2011-05-04
Federal Court Decisions4. “Ambassador Bridge Plaza Master Plan Study Report” – Exhibit G, for identification purposes, to the Transcript of Cross-examination of Kaarina Stiff. [...] [22] The Halcrow Report is a report dated June of 2009 entitled “Ambassador Bridge – Traffic and Revenue Study,” commissioned by the CTC from the Halcrow Group Limited. [...] 7. The “Ambassador Bridge Plaza – Master Plan Study Report” [23] The “Ambassador Bridge Plaza – Master Plan Study Report” is a report produced by the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA), dated February of 2010, that states the CBSA’s requirements for the Canadian-side plaza at the existing Ambassador Bridge site in the
-
3.
1185740 Ontario Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) - 2000-04-25
Federal Court Decisions[1] This is the judicial review of a decision of the Minister of National Revenue, dated February 5, 1998, amending the applicant"s licence to operate a Duty Free Shop at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, Ontario. [...] " The mayors of Windsor, Sarnia and Sault Ste-Marie as well as Mr. R. Gallaway, M.P. for Sarnia-Lambton, have made it clear that they do not support the sale of duty and tax free fuel at the Ambassador Bridge Duty Free Shop; [...] " The Windsor-Detroit Tunnel Duty Free Shop operator believes that the KPMG study is flawed and that the sale of duty and tax free fuel at the Ambassador Bridge would have a serious negative impact on the Windsor area.
-
4.
Canadian Transit Company v. Windsor (City) - 2014 FC 461 - 2014-05-21
Federal Court Decisions[4] The Applicant, the CTC, purchased 114 properties between 2004 and 2013 in the community of Olde Sandwich Towne in Windsor, Ontario, located immediately west of the Canadian side of the Ambassador Bridge. [...] These purchases were made as part of a long standing effort to construct a second span of the Ambassador Bridge over the Detroit River. [...] [6] In October 2013, the Applicant filed an application to the Federal Court seeking a declaration that, among other things, the Ambassador Bridge is considered a “federal undertaking”, and as such, is not subject to municipal by-laws.
-
5.
Levin v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2022 FC 1091 - 2022-07-25
Federal Court Decisions[5] In 2015, the Applicant applied to renew her work permit, in person, at the Ambassador Bridge port of entry. [...] [8] On June 7, 2021, the Applicant applied for a renewed work permit, in person, at the Ambassador Bridge port of entry. [...] On October 8, 2021, the Applicant returned to the Ambassador Bridge port of entry seeking the issuance of the work permit for which she received the IRCC initial approval.
-
6.
Thompson v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2022 FC 1739 - 2022-12-15
Federal Court DecisionsHe returned to Canada via the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, Ontario. When he imported goods in 2014, he received a remission of duties pursuant to the Remission Order. [...] [41] The Respondent argues that the evidence shows that the Applicant reported the importation of goods at the Windsor Ambassador Bridge customs office, instead of at the Cornwall customs office, he did not comply with section 8(a) of the Remission Order and accordingly, the conditions for the remission of duties did not [...] the Akwesasne Residents Remission Order (91-1129) as the goods were reported under section 12 of the CA at the Windsor – Ambassador Bridge instead of the Cornwall customs office at the time of importation and accounted for at the Windsor – Ambassador Bridge instead of the Cornwall customs office under section 32 of the CA.
-
7.
Canadian Frontline Nurses v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2024 FC 42 - 2024-01-29
Federal Court Decisions• the Province of Ontario with respect to the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, Ontario; and [...] • -The Prime Minister spoke to the Mayor of Windsor on February 10, 2022 about the blockade at the Ambassador Bridge. [...] The Minister also spoke with the Mayor of Windsor on February 11, 2022 concerning the Ambassador Bridge.
-
8.
Segasayo v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2007 FC 585 - 2007-06-05
Federal Court Decisions[2] Maximin Segasayo (the applicant), was the Rwandan ambassador to Canada from 1991 to 1995. [...] It is on that basis that the applicant, as an ambassador, was considered to be a person within the meaning of paragraph 19(1)(l). [...] [55] I must admit that I have a lot of difficulties accepting this particular explanation by the ambassador.
-
9.
Gavriluta v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2013 FC 705 - 2013-06-25
Federal Court DecisionsReceived call from Officer Smith, Customs & Border Control at Windsor Ambassador Bridge stating that she is currently interviewing the subject who is re-entering the USA after being in Canada for work for the last 2 weeks. [...] “Received call from Officer Smith, Customs & Border Control at Windsor Ambassador Bridge stating that she is currently interviewing the subject [Mr. Gavriluta] who is reentering the USA after being in Canada for work for the last 2 weeks.
-
10.
Karim v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2018 FC 453 - 2018-04-27
Federal Court DecisionsCity of Windsor involved a dispute over a number of vacant properties owned by Canadian Transit Company, which also owns and operates the Canadian half of the Ambassador Bridge. [...] The Canadian Transit Company sought a declaration that as the properties related to a federal undertaking, the Ambassador Bridge, the Canadian Transit Company was not subject to municipal by-laws.
-
11.
Segasayo v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) - 2007 FC 372 - 2007-04-11
Federal Court Decisions[3] The applicant was the Rwandan ambassador to Canada from 1991 to 1995. [...] As a result of his prior status as the Rwandan ambassador of two designated regimes, the applicant was advised by CIC on July 20, 1998, that he was inadmissible to be landed in Canada, in accordance with paragraph 19(1)(l) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2. [...] Both of my colleagues have dealt with the lacuna in the rules by applying rule 4 of the Federal Courts Rules in order to bridge the “gap” left by this “legislative oversight” (Naeem, above).
-
12.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Patterson - 2004 FC 1292 - 2004-09-21
Federal Court Decisions[9] On the same day, that is June 26, 2004, the Respondent entered Canada by car at the Windsor Ambassador Bridge.
-
13.
744185 Ontario Incorporated (Air Muskoka) v. Canada (Transport) - 2017 FC 764 - 2017-08-11
Federal Court Decisions[24] In support of that position the Crown relies upon ITO, Windsor Bridge and many other cases. [...] [38] Does the Federal Court have jurisdiction over the Third Party Claim in light of the tripartite test articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in ITO and modified by Windsor Bridge? [...] The Canadian Transit Company sought a declaration that as the properties related to a federal undertaking, i.e. the Ambassador Bridge, it was not subject to municipal by-laws.
-
14.
Mendez Santos v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2015 FC 1326 - 2015-11-27
Federal Court DecisionsHe arrived in Canada on July 31, 2014, after crossing the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, Ontario, and immediately claimed protection.
-
15.
1185740 Ontario Ltd. v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) - 1998-05-11
Federal Court Decisions[3] The applicant was, at all material times, the holder of a licence to operate a duty free shop at the Ambassador Bridge, Windsor, Ontario.
-
16.
Mowatt v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2021 FC 371 - 2021-04-28
Federal Court Decisions[7] On January 21, 2017, the Applicant was in a vehicle that mistakenly traveled across the Ambassador Bridge to the Canada-US border.
-
17.
Hussein v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2018 FC 44 - 2018-01-17
Federal Court Decisions[6] The Applicant first entered Canada on July 26, 2010, at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, Ontario.
-
18.
José Pereira E. Hijos, S.A. v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2005 FC 1011 - 2005-07-26
Federal Court DecisionsHe would further appear never, or at least rarely, to have been on the bridge of the ESTAI during the passage through ice. [...] He would appear not to have had meaningful conversations with Captain Davila or other officers of the ESTAI who would have been on the bridge. [...] [148] Through an interpreter, Mr. Santiago testified that, shortly after the ESTAI was boarded, he was summoned to the bridge.
-
19.
Canadian Constitution Foundation v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2022 FC 1233 - 2022-08-26
Federal Court DecisionsThe protest movement spread to different parts of the country, including to ports of entry such as Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, Ontario and the border crossing in Coutts, Alberta.
-
20.
Apotex Inc. v. Ambrose - 2017 FC 487 - 2017-05-10
Federal Court Decisions[56] At the trial level, the primary relief requested by the Canadian Transit Company was for a declaration that the Ambassador Bridge be considered a “federal undertaking” and, as such, not subject to municipal by-laws (Canadian Transit Company at para 6).
-
21.
Bilodeau-Massé v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2017 FC 604 - 2017-06-19
Federal Court DecisionsWindsor had issued over 100 repair orders against 114 properties purchased between 2004 and 2013 as part of a project to expand the Ambassador Bridge. [...] Canadian Transit refused to comply, arguing that the bridge facilities are federal undertakings to which municipal by-laws do not apply. [...] Canadian Transit wanted to obtain a Court declaration that the bridge was to be considered a “federal undertaking” and therefore could not be subject to municipal by-laws.
-
22.
Abdelrazik v. Canada (Foreign Affairs) - 2009 FC 580 - 2009-06-04
Federal Court Decisions7. The possibility of a Canadian Forces bridge flight from Khartoum to Canadian Forces Camp Mirage in the Middle East and then to Canada on a Canadian Forces flight; [...] By letter dated April 15, 2003 Canada’s Ambassador and Permanent Representative wrote to the Security Council requesting that it inform the 1267 Committee that Canada “has implemented all of these measures through, inter alia, legislative and regulatory instruments, as described in the attached document” (emphasis added).