Abella danger crypto

Comment

Author: Admin | 2025-04-28

Sectors of Papua New Guinea’s otherwise ailing economy. But exploitation of these resources has also led to violence, human rights abuse, corruption and environmental damage. The Porgera gold mine—the subject of this report— had largely ignored until the mine’s development. is a potent symbol of both the perils and the Because of the mine, Porgera has gone from financial rewards that extractive industries hold for being a forgotten backwater to one of the primary Papua new guinea. The mine is 95 percent owned engines of the national economy. since 1990 the and solely operated by Barrick gold, a Canadian Porgera Joint Venture (PJV) has produced more corporation that is the world’s largest gold mining than 16 million ounces of gold and accounted for company. it has been a central part of Papua new roughly 12 percent of Papua new guinea’s total guinea’s economy since it opened in 1990, but exports. [Show full text] Placer Dome Canada Ltd. V. Ontario (Minister of DATE: 20060525 Finance), DOCKET: 30580 2006 SCC 20 [2006] S.C.J SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Placer Dome Canada Ltd. v. Ontario (Minister of DATE: 20060525 Finance), DOCKET: 30580 2006 SCC 20 [2006] S.C.J. No. 20 BETWEEN: Ontario (Minister of Finance) Appellant and Placer Dome Canada Limited Respondent CORAM: Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: LeBel J. (Bastarache, Binnie, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and (paras. 1 to 53) Charron JJ. concurring) NOTE: This document is subject to editorial revision before its reproduction in final form in the Canada Supreme Court Reports. ______________________________ placer dome canada v. ontario (min. of finance) Ontario (Minister of Finance) Appellant v. Placer Dome Canada Limited Respondent Indexed as: Placer Dome Canada Ltd. v. Ontario (Minister of Finance) Neutral citation: 2006 SCC 20. File No.: 30580. 2005: November 17; 2006: May 25. Present: Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario Taxation — Mining tax — Hedging — Whether definition of “hedging” in mining tax legislation restricted to transactions that result in delivery of output of mine — Mining Tax Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.15, s. 1(1) “hedging”. Statutes — Interpretation — Taxation legislation — Administrative practices — Presumption against tautology — Meaning of definition of “hedging” in mining tax legislation — Mining Tax Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.15, s. 1(1) “hedging”. In late 1993, PDC entered into an agreement with its parent company, PDI, whereby PDI was designated PDC’s exclusive agent for the purpose of conducting hedging activity. In 1995 and 1996, pursuant to that agreement, PDI carried out hedging transactions on PDC’s behalf in order to protect the PDI Group from fluctuations in the spot price of gold. [Show

Add Comment