Haque v. Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651
| Jurisdiction | Federal Jurisdiction (Canada) |
| Court | Federal Court (Canada) |
| Citation | 2018 FC 651 |
| Date | 22 June 2018 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
5 practice notes
-
Lum v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 797
...of the duty of procedural fairness (see Makavitch v Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FC 940 at para 29; Haque v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651 at paras 62-63 [Haque]). Regardless, in my view, this factor weighs in the Applicants’ favour in terms of greater procedural fairness. As doe......
-
Jackson v. Canada (Attorney General),
...Minister, and then the Minister’s decision, are rendered. [42] A similar approach was adopted in Haque v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651 at para 64 [Haque], in which Justice John Norris noted that the current policy approach provides applicants with a fair process in accordanc......
-
Ritchie v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 342
...and law (Vavilov at paras 85-86, citing Dunsmuir v New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9 [Dunsmuir] at para 47; Haque v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651 [Haque] at para 55). [16] Procedural fairness is a matter for the Court to determine. The standard for determining whether the decision-maker co......
-
Makavitch v. Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FC 940
...as to the meaning of “minimal” in the context of the refusal to issue an initial security clearance: Haque v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651 at paras 60 – 63 [Haque]. [30] Arguably, as Mr. Makavitch at the time he applied for the Enhanced RS clearance already held a Top Secret cleara......
Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
-
Lum v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 797
...of the duty of procedural fairness (see Makavitch v Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FC 940 at para 29; Haque v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651 at paras 62-63 [Haque]). Regardless, in my view, this factor weighs in the Applicants’ favour in terms of greater procedural fairness. As doe......
-
Jackson v. Canada (Attorney General),
...Minister, and then the Minister’s decision, are rendered. [42] A similar approach was adopted in Haque v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651 at para 64 [Haque], in which Justice John Norris noted that the current policy approach provides applicants with a fair process in accordanc......
-
Ritchie v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 342
...and law (Vavilov at paras 85-86, citing Dunsmuir v New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9 [Dunsmuir] at para 47; Haque v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651 [Haque] at para 55). [16] Procedural fairness is a matter for the Court to determine. The standard for determining whether the decision-maker co......
-
Makavitch v. Canada (Attorney General), 2019 FC 940
...as to the meaning of “minimal” in the context of the refusal to issue an initial security clearance: Haque v Canada (Attorney General), 2018 FC 651 at paras 60 – 63 [Haque]. [30] Arguably, as Mr. Makavitch at the time he applied for the Enhanced RS clearance already held a Top Secret cleara......
Request a trial to view additional results