Your search
Results 444 resources
-
This article considers the appropriate forum for disputing a denied downward transfer-pricing adjustment under subsection 247(10) of the Income Tax Act ("the ITA"). It begins by describing various scenarios in which a request for a downward transfer-pricing adjustment may arise, examines the delegation to officials at the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) of the authority to grant the adjustment, and outlines the CRA's administrative practice on when to grant such adjustments. It then explores whether the Federal Court or the Tax Court of Canada is the appropriate forum to adjudicate a denied downward transfer-pricing adjustment. For disputes under the ITA, the division of jurisdiction between the two courts is generally well defined. The Tax Court has the exclusive jurisdiction to determine the correctness of an assessment whereas the Federal Court has the exclusive jurisdiction to review discretionary decisions of the minister of national revenue or officials at the CRA to whom the minister's powers have been delegated. This jurisdictional divide is less clear for disputes in respect of a denied downward transfer-pricing adjustment. Subsection 247(10) is the only provision in the ITA under which the correct determination of a taxpayer's income is subject to ministerial discretion. The exercise of ministerial discretion suggests that the appropriate forum to dispute a denied transfer-pricing adjustment is the Federal Court. However, subsection 247(11) specifies that the mechanisms for resolving all transfer-pricing disputes under part XVI.1 of the ITA are through the objection and appeal process in part I of the ITA. The language of subsection 247(11), coupled with its legislative history, the restrictions on the Federal Court's jurisdiction, and practical considerations regarding transfer-pricing disputes, all suggest that the Tax Court is the appropriate forum to consider a denied downward transfer-pricing adjustment. Historical case law from the Exchequer Court supports this conclusion. However, there are scenarios in which a denied downward transfer-pricing adjustment may not result in a notice of assessment being issued, and therefore no clear right of appeal to the Tax Court may exist. To ensure that the Tax Court has the jurisdiction to review all denied downward transfer-pricing adjustments, and not only those that result in an assessment, the authors recommend that part XVI.1 of the ITA be amended to include language requiring the minister to issue an assessment in all cases in which a downward transfer-pricing adjustment is denied.
-
People have procedural rights because states are under a duty of political morality to provide them with fair procedures for settling disputes about the application of the laws. This obligation flows from the state's duty to treat each person as a free and equal member of the legal order. Yet adherence to procedural rights can impede accuracy in fact-finding, which in turn can result in poor protection for substantive rights. So the state also has a duty to provide a reasonable degree of accuracy in fact-finding. The legal order should therefore strive to improve the accuracy of fact-finding, within the constraints imposed by procedural rights people have. Nevertheless, the duty to provide reasonably accurate procedures is subordinate to the duty to provide procedural rights because the settlement of disputes among free persons must be conducted in a manner that respects their status as free persons.
-
Le privilège parlementaire, essentiel au bon fonctionnement du parlementarisme canadien, est trop souvent mal compris par les tribunaux, mais également par les parlementaires eux-mêmes, qui vont parfois l’invoquer de manière abusive. Depuis l’avènement de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, les tribunaux tentent, avec un succès mitigé, de réconcilier le privilège parlementaire avec les droits et libertés constitutionnels. À l’aide d’une étude de la jurisprudence et de la doctrine, l’auteur analyse de manière critique le modèle canadien de privilège parlementaire. Il tente tout d’abord de bien comprendre les bases historiques et constitutionnelles du privilège au Canada. Par la suite, il circonscrit les principaux problèmes de l’approche de la Cour suprême du Canada en la matière pour ensuite proposer des pistes de solution, adressées aux tribunaux, mais aussi aux parlementaires, afin de mieux adapter le privilège parlementaire aux réalités du xxie siècle.
-
Volume 49, Nº 1 | Volume 49, Issue 1
-
This article describes constitutional conventions, and the underlying principles of the Constitution assessed through structural analysis, as two interrelated components of Canada’s unwritten constitution. Whereas conventions and structural analysis differ in their relationship with the text of constitutional instruments, and in regard with their normative power, they perform similar functions in our constitutional order as they both seek to give effect to broad and enduring principles undergirding the organization of the state.
-
This article is about structural analysis in Canadian constitutional law. Structural analysis is a methodology for identifying unwritten components of the constitution and giving them effect. These unwritten components—Parliamentary privilege, Crown prerogative, constitutional conventions and underlying constitutional principles—pertain to the basic institutions of the state and the norms that govern their operations and relations. We explain how structural analysis operates and show that it is essential to discerning and applying the unwritten constitution.
-
2020 41 Windsor Review of Legal and Social Issues, 2020 CanLIIDocs 1608
Explore
Resource type
Topics
- Criminal law (1)
- Equity (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Voyeurism (1)
Publication year
-
Between 1900 and 1999
(98)
-
Between 1910 and 1919
(1)
- 1918 (1)
- Between 1930 and 1939 (4)
- Between 1940 and 1949 (3)
- Between 1950 and 1959 (5)
- Between 1960 and 1969 (13)
- Between 1970 and 1979 (10)
- Between 1980 and 1989 (23)
- Between 1990 and 1999 (39)
-
Between 1910 and 1919
(1)
-
Between 2000 and 2026
(346)
- Between 2000 and 2009 (114)
- Between 2010 and 2019 (133)
- Between 2020 and 2026 (99)