7,644 result(s)
-
501.
Panacci v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2010 FC 114 - 2010-02-03
Federal Court DecisionsThere was no question raised as to the Commission’s true jurisdiction to deal with the Applicant’s complaint. [...] There has never been any serious challenge to the Commission’s jurisdiction to deal with the case. [...] [59] Most fundamentally, the Commission carried out a full, fair and thorough investigation.
-
502.
Marcel Colomb First Nation v. Colomb - 2016 FC 1270 - 2016-11-15
Federal Court DecisionsSuch further and other relief as this Honourable Court may deem fair and just in the circumstances [...] [110] The most basic elements of natural justice and procedural fairness were ignored in this case. [...] The MCC point to several such “flaws” and I will deal with each in turn.
-
503.
Anderson v. Tait-Reaume - 2022 FC 1382 - 2022-10-06
Federal Court Decisions[61] I will deal with reasonableness in the next following portion of these Reasons. [...] [63] The Applicant submits the following breaches of procedural fairness: [...] The Respondent’s on the EAC took issue with a “deal” taking place and being advertised for the first time allegedly during an election “black out” period, thereby engaging in corrupt practices.
-
504.
Daley v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2016 FC 1154 - 2016-10-17
Federal Court Decisions2. Did the OPC breach the rules of natural justice and its duty of fairness toward the applicant? [...] B. Did the OPC breach the rules of natural justice and its duty of fairness toward the applicant? [...] [46] The characterization of the legal proceedings by the OPC as “damages arising out of business dealings” is misleading.
-
505.
Harkat (Re) - 2011 FC 75 - 2011-01-21
Federal Court DecisionsIf a question arises on the facts of a case before an applications judge, it is the judge's duty to deal with it. [...] - Questions that the Court did not deem necessary to deal with. Analysis [...] Hence, as this Court did not find it necessary to deal with this question, it is not a proper question for certification.
-
506.
Gomez v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2021 FC 1300 - 2021-11-25
Federal Court DecisionsHe argues that this calls for a higher level of procedural fairness. However, these submissions are about the application of a duty of procedural fairness and not about a legitimate expectation that could inform the level of procedural fairness owed. [...] He stated that he is not a friend of Mr. Cabello and has never had business dealings with him. [...] (a) the dealing, directly or indirectly, by any person in Canada or Canadian outside Canada in any property, wherever situated, of the foreign national;
-
507.
Rodriguez Vieira v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) - 2012 FC 838 - 2012-06-29
Federal Court Decisions[12] Where issues of procedural fairness arise, the task for the Court is to determine whether the process the Board followed satisfied the level of fairness required in the circumstances: see Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Khosa, 2009 SCC 12, [2009] 1 S.C.R. 339 at para. 43. [...] 68. In the absence of a provision in these Rules dealing with a matter raised during the proceedings, the Division may do whatever is necessary to deal with the matter. [...] It is, therefore, properly part of the Board’s role to identify which issues to deal with first, in order to secure the most just, fair and expeditious determination of the claim coming before it.
-
508.
Sebai v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 1999-10-12
Federal Court DecisionsCounsel for Mr. Sebai argued that this was a breach of the visa officer's duty of procedural fairness, and I agree. [...] The first part deals with the merits of Mr. Sebai's claim to be on "entrepreneur" within the statutory definition. [...] The second part deals with the application of paragraph 19(2)(a.i)(ii).
-
509.
Schreiber v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2007 FC 618 - 2007-06-11
Federal Court DecisionsIt held that the Applicant’s surrender to Germany would not offend the Canadian sense of what is fair, right and just. [...] (b) failed to observe a principle of natural justice, procedural fairness or other procedure that it was required by law to observe; [...] The Applicant obviously recognized the Ontario Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction to deal with these matters.
-
510.
P&O Ports Inc. v. International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union, Local 500 - 2008 FC 846 - 2008-07-09
Federal Court Decisions5. Was there a breach of natural justice and procedural fairness? STANDARD OF REVIEW [...] [17] The final issue raised on this application is one of procedural fairness. [...] Issue 5: Was there a breach of natural justice and procedural fairness?
-
511.
Hagel v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2009 FC 329 - 2009-03-31
Federal Court Decisions(b) Did procedural fairness require that the decision-maker attend the hearing of the grievance in person? [...] Because we are not dealing with classification grievances in the ordinary sense, but with a novel situation, a fresh standard of review analysis is appropriate. [...] Procedural Fairness [28] It is well-established that procedural fairness is reviewable on a correctness standard:
-
512.
Nicholson v. CWS Industries Ltd. - 2002 FCT 1225 - 2002-11-26
Federal Court DecisionsWithout more, documents dealing with profit on the Defendant's mode of connection, between the rake and the machine, have no formal relevance. [...] First, I had some initial difficulty with a reference to a portion of an attached document as fair notice of a claim. [...] [17] This approach, attach patent and a clear reference in the statement of claim to the applicable portions of the patent, deals with the concern which Lord Normand had in Essso Petroleum (supra), that of giving fair notice what the action was all about.
-
513.
Allard v. Canada (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) - 2016 FC 1235 - 2016-11-04
Federal Court DecisionsThey further claim that the Committee also breached its duty of procedural fairness by assigning a role to one of its members that it should not have assigned. [...] [18] In this case, given my response to the first issue, it will be necessary to deal with the third issue, but not the second. [...] [19] As I have just noted, the Court is not required to exercise deference in determining whether the rules of procedural fairness have been followed in a given case.
-
514.
McLean v. Canada - 2019 FC 1075 - 2019-08-19
Federal Court DecisionsThe best that can be done is to have a fair and reasonable settlement of the litigation. [...] Is the Settlement fair and reasonable and in the best interests of the Class? [...] It is not for this Court to deal with these issues but the Court file is public and is available to the regulators if deemed by them necessary.
-
515.
Brown v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2004 FC 954 - 2004-07-05
Federal Court DecisionsBecause the respondent did not have a proper opportunity to prepare its response to this argument, the Court, in agreement with the parties, scheduled a second hearing to deal only with this issue and gave the parties permission to file supplementary material. [...] [30] A subset of the duty of procedural fairness is that decisions be made by unbiased decision- makers. [...] [39] At the hearing, when dealing with the allegation of partiality of IPSO Frankovitch, the respondent also said that an independent assessment had been made by the third member of the team, Mr. Granovic, on December 18 as well as on December 21, 2001.
-
516.
Lill v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2024 FC 664 - 2024-05-01
Federal Court DecisionsAnything dealing with his complaints and correction requests that we cannot use is in red. [...] C. Procedural Fairness [43] In his memorandum, Mr. Lill also argues that the manner in which his grievance was analyzed breached procedural fairness. [...] Given that I am addressing this issue from the perspective of the decision’s reasonableness, it is not necessary to deal with it from a procedural fairness perspective.
-
517.
Goldmaker v. Canada (Minister of National Revenue) - 2000-03-03
Federal Court Decisions[4] A "fairness fact sheet" was prepared on behalf of the Minister on March 25, 1998. [...] [7] A second "fairness fact sheet" was prepared by Revenue Canada. This fact sheet, completed on May 8, 1998 and approved on May 14, 1998 also recommended that the taxpayer"s request for fairness be denied. [...] The purpose of this legislative provision is to allow Revenue Canada, Taxation, to administer the tax system more fairly, by allowing for the application of common sense in dealing with taxpayers who, because of personal misfortune or circumstances beyond their control, are unable to meet deadlines or comply with rules
-
518.
Muskego v. Norway House Cree Nation Appeal Committee - 2011 FC 732 - 2011-06-20
Federal Court Decisions2. Did the Respondent Appeal Committee breach procedural fairness in allowing [...] That provision clearly confers on the Committee the jurisdiction to deal with “any additional election procedures resulting from any appeal”. [...] [26] ...The jurisprudence of the Court is clear; such issues dealing with procedural fairness must be raised at the earliest opportunity.
-
519.
Canada (Attorney General) v. Davis - 2009 FC 1104 - 2009-10-28
Federal Court DecisionsWhen it comes to procedural fairness, the Court owes no deference to the Commission. [...] Procedural fairness is contextual (Baker v. Canada (M.C.I.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817). [...] [5] It is true that artful pleaders can find any number of errors when dealing with decisions of administrative tribunals.
-
520.
Belzile v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2006 FC 983 - 2006-08-15
Federal Court Decisions[57] The content of the duty of procedural fairness of the PSC varies according to the context. [...] The process specified in subsections 6(2) and 6(3) of the Act gives the PSC a means of exercising control and dealing severely with cases of abuse. [...] It does not specifically deal with this aspect. [5] This paragraph of the respondent’s memorandum in T-1006-05 is found in all of the cases.
-
521.
Marie-Jewell v. Salt River First Nation #195 - 2024 FC 192 - 2024-02-07
Federal Court DecisionsThis matter does not deal with a commercial or contractual agreement of a private nature, and thus the cases cited by the Respondent are of limited applicability. [...] In this case, the Court is dealing with a Decision rendered by SRFN with respect to election eligibility. [...] C. Was the Applicant denied procedural fairness? [48] My finding on the unreasonableness of the Decision is determinative and there is no need to consider the submissions on procedural fairness.
-
522.
Syed v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2020 FC 608 - 2020-05-11
Federal Court Decisions[8] By letter dated May 2, 2017, the Commission decided to deal with the Applicant’s complaint. [...] The correctness standard continues to apply to issues of procedural fairness. [...] 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
-
523.
Arachchige v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) - 2006 FC 467 - 2006-04-10
Federal Court Decisions· "So my questions will be dealt with ...will be dealing with the heart of the claim. [...] The questions were consistent in dealing with each of the applicant's allegations: why do you fear this particular agent of persecution? [...] The principles of natural justice and procedural fairness require a fair hearing, not necessarily a perfect hearing: Ruby v. Canada(Solicitor General), 2002 SCC 75 at paragraph 46.
-
524.
Bitton v. HSBC Bank Canada - 2006 FC 1347 - 2006-11-09
Federal Court DecisionsThis is so because we are essentially dealing with a finding of fact requiring the decision-maker to weigh evidence. [...] The reasons for dismissal offered by the employer to justify the fairness of the dismissal [...] Could the employer have employed other sanctions to deal with this employee?
-
525.
Pindi v. Canada (Attorney General) - 2023 FC 1252 - 2023-09-19
Federal Court DecisionsThe Commission declined to deal with the complaint after determining that the human rights issues Mr. Pindi raised had already been addressed in the CAF's internal settlement process. [...] It is therefore appropriate to deal first with the issue of procedural fairness. [...] [59] Procedural fairness is based on the principle that individuals involved in a judicial process should be given the opportunity to present their position fairly.