Your search

"This book provides an extensive account of the origins and evolution of the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR), and offers a comprehensive examination and appraisal of the rule. The book's 28 chapters encompass a wide variety of perspectives on the GAAR; contributors include tax practitioners, academics from around the world, and government officials from the Canada Revenue Agency and the Department of Justice, as well as the former Supreme Court of Canada justice who wrote the reasons for judgment in the leading GAAR case. The book, unique in the thoroughness of its approach and the diversity of its points of view, is intended as the go-to source for government officials, tax professionals, academics, and judges--a reference book covering all aspects of the GAAR: its historical background, its major structural features and shortcomings, the evolution of the case law dealing with the GAAR, and the interpretive issues that continue to cause uncertainty."-- Provided by publisher.

"Canadian Income Tax Law provides readers with an overview of the foundations of tax law, including critical cases and expert commentary. Introductory chapters provide a foundation for the study of statutory provisions and judicial decisions, including up-to-date caselaw and analysis; the remaining chapters follow the structure of the Income Tax Act."-- Provided by publisher.

"This book provides an extensive account of the origins and evolution of the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR), and offers a comprehensive examination and appraisal of the rule. The book's 28 chapters encompass a wide variety of perspectives on the GAAR; contributors include tax practitioners, academics from around the world, and government officials from the Canada Revenue Agency and the Department of Justice, as well as the former Supreme Court of Canada justice who wrote the reasons for judgment in the leading GAAR case. The book, unique in the thoroughness of its approach and the diversity of its points of view, is intended as the go-to source for government officials, tax professionals, academics, and judges--a reference book covering all aspects of the GAAR: its historical background, its major structural features and shortcomings, the evolution of the case law dealing with the GAAR, and the interpretive issues that continue to cause uncertainty."-- Provided by publisher

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Do states have a duty to assimilate refugees to their own citizens? Are refugees entitled to freedom of movement, to be allowed to work, to have access to public welfare programs, or to be reunited with family members? Indeed, is there even a duty to admit refugees at all? This fundamentally rewritten second edition of the award-winning treatise presents the only comprehensive analysis of the human rights of refugees set by the UN Refugee Convention and international human rights law. It follows the refugee's journey from flight to solution, examining every rights issue both historically and by reference to the decisions of senior courts from around the world. Nor is this a purely doctrinal book: Hathaway's incisive legal analysis is tested against and applied to hundreds of protection challenges around the world, ensuring the relevance of this book's analysis to responding to the hard facts of refugee life on the ground.

A political practice and institution found in most civilisations throughout history, asylum in the twenty-first century finds itself in a tumultuous period. The 1951 Refugee Convention regime endures, but many States are trying hard to prevent asylum-seekers from reaching their borders. With refugee resettlement stuck at one per cent of the needs, it is no wonder that refugees finding no other solution to build a future for their family will resort to other means to reach places where they can hope to thrive. Destination States are deploying multiple strategies to avoid being responsible for thousands of refugees. They have thus considerably strengthened their ‘fight’ against undocumented migration and are criminalising asylum-seekers through importing into administrative law concepts and institutions of criminal law, while some have adopted deterrence tactics or implemented ‘externalisation strategies’. They also have devalued the principle of non-refoulement, either through directly refouling or through use of tactics resulting in refoulement. Asylum-seekers are also subjected to biometric identifiers stored in databases interconnected with multiple other databases, nationally and internationally. This chapter explores global trends and challenges in asylum in the twenty-first century and outlines main approaches in the field.

This chapter explores customary refugee law. Refugee law is primarily treaty law. However, many of the major refugee-receiving countries are not parties to either the Refugee Convention or the Refugee Protocol, for example Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Iran, Jordan, and Lebanon. Hence, customary international refugee law can be critically important in the identification of key principles of refugee protection and as an indication of what is permitted or not. While customary international law may not play as significant a role in refugee law as it does in other areas of international law, there are at least three practices of refugee protection aimed at safeguarding access and admission to refugee protection for which varying degrees of agreement exist in favour of a rule (or emerging rule) of customary law: non-refoulement, temporary refuge, and the right to be granted (to receive) asylum. These practices are deeply intertwined in their humanitarian purpose.

Rendered in December 2019, the Vavilov decision sets the contemporary analytical framework for the judicial review of an administrative decision on the merits. On this occasion, the Supreme Court expressed the desire to add a certain degree of certainty and consistency to this field of law. This article focuses on the new approach’s propensity to achieve that goal. The analysis begins with the observation that there exists a connection between the instability that has historically characterized the law of judicial review and the failure of previous approaches to adequately guide reviewing courts in the fulfillment of their mission, which consists of balancing the rule of law and legislative supremacy. In light of earlier case law, the author concludes that the Vavilov decision offers the prospect of greater certainty in determining the applicable standard of review, but that the risk of instability remains with respect to the application of the reasonableness standard. Indeed, while the Supreme Court’s guidance in this regard generally reflects a concern to alleviate the tension underlying the relationship between rule of law and legislative supremacy principles, some of the majority justices’ assertions, namely that certain statutory provisions “relating to the scope of a decision maker’s authority” may involve only one interpretation, may weaken the self-discipline of reviewing courts on which judicial deference is based.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.