Next Section

Previous Section

 
 AUGER.................1
Author: François  Auger  2
 
 AUGUST................2
-(IT)I, rendered on  August  , in which Teskey J. described more than thirty 896
Lawrence Wolf v. The Queen, --IT-G, rendered on  August  , by 958
 
 AUTHOR................4
 Author : François Auger 2
residence. The  author  Evans states the following: 72
This rule had already been stated by the  author  Brisson and was reiterated in St-Hilaire v. 724
The  author  acknowledges with thanks the assistance of Julie Gaudreault-Martel (student-872
 
 AUTHORITATIVE.........1
Art. . Both the common law and the civil law are equally  authoritative  and recognized 758
 
 AUTHORITIES...........10
Quebec allows the relevant tax  authorities  to levy tax on an individuals world-wide income.36
determined by the  authorities , by business requirements, etc.; 118
federal tax  authorities  assumed that, where a Canadian resident was absent from Canada for 234
 authorities  a person can turn to exercise his civil rights. Translation Domicile determines the 486
interests are centralized; those operations generally involve the intervention of legal  authorities  on 488
Contrary to the statements of the federal tax  authorities  in Interpretation Bulletin IT-594
person is considered to be a non-resident by the federal tax  authorities  and a resident for the 598
 authorities  have introduced a subjective element into the analysis of the notion of residence.616
for individuals. On this point, we may refer to the following  authorities , among others:632
(d) if he is a citizen of both States or of neither of them, the competent  authorities  of the 956
 
 AUTHORITY.............1
intervention of an  authority  and, for reasons of efficiency and sound administration, jurisdiction is 484
 
 AUTOMATIC.............1
sojourning to define who is denied an  automatic  stay. In my opinion, the internal consistency 1016
 
 AVAILABLE.............3
I am of the view that the appellant had a permanent home  available  to him in both 196
home  available  to him; if he has a permanent home available to him in both States or in neither 950
home available to him; if he has a permanent home  available  to him in both States or in neither 950
 
 AVOID.................1
the exclusion of the application of the C.C.Q. in its entirety, to  avoid  creating a legal vacuum in 786
 
 BAER..................1
Marvin  BAER  et al., Private International Law in Common Law Canada, Cases, 966
 
 BANK..................3
holding credit cards and  bank  accounts in Canada; 134
married, but still, all his family was in the United States. His  bank  accounts and savings 200
and his stockbroker were all in the United States. Apart from one  bank  account and 202
 
 BAR...................1
Droit fédéral et droit civil: complémentarité, dissociation (), , Canadian  Bar  Review 1108
 
 BARREAU...............1
(), Revue du  Barreau  - and by Jean-Maurice BRISSON and André MOREL, 1108
 
 BARZINI...............1
applied. See also Feltrinelli v.  Barzini , R.J.Q. regarding change of domicile. 1036
 
 BASED.................7
cases, gives its own definition  based  on the goals and policies behind the legislation. 284
of civil rights, which is  based  on three main functions. First, domicile is a test linking an 482
of residence as well as the different weight to be given to these elements  based  on the legislative 676
adaptable interpretation  based  on the goal that a particular statute is intended to achieve.682
lead to unjustifiable differences of treatment among Canadian taxpayers  based  on their province 704
by Mogan J., refers to Thomson v. M.N.R., supra, note , and is  based  mainly on the following 886
defined  based  on its usual meaning and that physical presence was essential. The Court held as 1012
 
 BASIC.................1
the  basic  law of every province -- is the rule both in principle and, if only because 754
 
 BASIS.................6
on a temporary  basis  because the job was here. His contract was in fact extended, but 208
qualifications, and intends to reside in Canada on a permanent  basis , but also that he has 310
forms the  basis  for the international jurisdiction of Quebec courts. It can also happen 414
another place, but effectively stay there less time, or frequent it on a seasonal  basis  464
a non-contentious  basis . 490
who filed his or her return for the year on the  basis  that the person was resident in Canada 914
 
 BASISIN...............1
ownership of a dwelling or rental of a dwelling on a long-term  basisin  Canada; 128
 
 BEAMENT...............2
 Beament  v. MNR, C.T.C. (S.C.C.). 814
See, among others,  Beament  v. M.N.R. D.T.C. (S.C.C.), where the taxpayer's 1096
 
 BECOMES...............1
reveals that this concept, which at first appears to be a purely civil one,  becomes  paramount in 442
 
 BED...................1
for separation from  bed  and board, that the wife had proved the change of domicile by a firm 1034
 
 BEGIN.................1
We will  begin  by describing and comparing the concepts of residence and domicile as they are 46
 
 BELL..................1
It was held in  Bell  v. Kennedy (), LR Sc. Div. , , that if the intention 968
 
 BELONGINGS............1
storage of personal  belongings  in Canada; 140
 
 BENCHMARKS............1
Translation Canadian and Quebec case law has established certain  benchmarks  such 622
 
 BENEFICIARIES.........1
 beneficiaries . 942
 
 BERGELT...............2
The Queen v.  Bergelt , C.T.C. (F.C.). 820
intention was examined but the Court gave more weight to other factors.  Bergelt  v. M.N.R., 1096
 
 BETTEN................1
Rijkele  Betten , Income Tax Aspects of Emigration and Immigration of Individuals, 830
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY..........2
 BIBLIOGRAPHY  26
 BIBLIOGRAPHY  790
 
 BIDERMAN..............1
(F.C.A.);  Biderman  v. Canada (), N.R. (F.C.A.).) What it does mean is that 744
 
 BILL..................2
The harmonization  bill  entitled A First Act to harmonize federal law with the civil law of the 714
. One of the main components of the  bill  is an amendment to the federal Interpretation 718
 
 BIRTH.................1
consideration of the connection by reason of  birth , marriage or previous long association with 1094
 
 BISSON................2
Alain-François  BISSON , La Disposition préliminaire du Code Civil du Québec the 848
See in this respect the articles by Alain-François  BISSON , La Disposition préliminaire 1104
 
 BLAHA.................2
In  Blaha  v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Rand J. confirmed that residence in 304
 Blaha  v. Department of Citizenship and Immigration, F.C. . This case 982
 
 BLAIS.................2
persons, nd edition, Cowansville, Éd. Yvon  Blais , , chap. III. 840
ed., Cowansville, Yvon  Blais , , at p. . 1020
 
 BLANCHETTE............1
Luc  Blanchette , La résidence des individus en droit fiscal canadien et québécois, Thesis 832
 
 BOARD.................1
for separation from bed and  board , that the wife had proved the change of domicile by a firm 1034
 
 BODY..................1
and limited utility. As a consequence of this statutory vacuum, a significant  body  of 74
 
 BOIDMAN...............1
Nathan  BOIDMAN , L. Frank CHOPIN and Alan W. GRANWELL, The New U.S. 836
 
 BOSTON................1
 Boston  v. The Queen, D.T.C. (T.C.C.). 826
 
 BOUNDS................2
only to ascertain the spatial  bounds  within which he spends his life or to which his 102
two factors: (i) the spatial  bounds  within which he spends his life or to which his ordered or 886
 
 BRANCHES..............3
The notion of residence is not foreign to the various  branches  of statute law which, in several 282
found among the different  branches  of common law. The notion of residence is generally not 674
under the C.C.Q., but also from the notion of residence used in the other  branches  of common 710
 
 BRIAN.................1
 Brian  P. CASEY, Residence of Individuals () Revue de Planification fiscale 980
 
 BRIDGE................1
the individual carries on, away from Canada, specified work of limited duration ( bridge  586
 
 BRIEF.................1
living in a placeit implies an element of frequency, or routine, and differs from a  brief  or 398
 
 BRISSON...............10
tax matters must refer to it. According to Jean-Maurice  Brisson : 694
of residence. As Jean-Maurice  Brisson  states: 704
This rule had already been stated by the author  Brisson  and was reiterated in St-Hilaire v. 724
Jean-Maurice  BRISSON , Limpact du Civil Code du Québec sur le droit fédéral: une 850
Jean-Maurice  BRISSON  and André MOREL, Droit fédéral et droit civil: complémentarité, 854
 BRISSON , Limpact du Code civil du Québec sur le droit fédéral: une problématique 1106
(), Revue du Barreau - and by Jean-Maurice  BRISSON  and André MOREL, 1108
J.-M.  BRISSON , loc. cit., note , at p. . 1110
J.-M.  BRISSON  and A. MOREL, loc. cit., note , at p. . 1112
J.-M.  BRISSON , loc. cit., note , at p. . 1116
 
 BRITISH...............1
In pursuing numerous cases decided by the Canadian and  British  Courts, it is obvious 180
 
 BROADER...............1
not be confused. They do not cover the same thing, and one is  broader  than the 438
 
 BRUNEAU...............1
Guy Lord, Jacques Sasseville and Diane  Bruneau , Les principes de limposition au Canada 842

Next Section

Top of Section