George Klosler

The engineer who prepared the report for the Hambly-Sabourin and Beaulac-Beach Drains requested a review of the Tribunal's previous decision.

The Tribunal clarified its order regarding the maintenance of the downstream portion of the drain, directing that maintenance be limited to removing obstructions and stabilizing banks, with costs assessed 50% to adjoining properties and 50% to upstream properties.

The Tribunal also approved revised assessments for statutory and cut-off benefits, including a reduction for one property under section 34 of the Drainage Act due to prior over-assessment.

The Tribunal declined to allow direct appeals from the amended report, directing that the normal appeal procedure be followed.

The appellants, tobacco farmers, appealed a decision of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers’ Marketing Board denying their request for an exemption from the Board's no-rental policy.

The appellants sought to rent out 100% of their 2004 marketing quota due to the husband's health issues.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellants had not fully pursued other options such as sharegrowing, and that the Board's policy of minimizing production costs for active growers was reasonable.

The appellant hatchery appealed a $10,000 penalty assessed by the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg and Chick Commission for 22 instances of late payments to producers and 8 violations of Commission orders.

The appellant argued the penalty was too high given its cash flow problems and pending sale of the business.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no mitigating factors to excuse the regulatory obligations and concluding the $10,000 fine was proportional to the number of infractions and consistent with past penalties.

The engineer, K. Smart Associates Limited, requested a review and clarification of a previous Tribunal decision regarding the Hambly-Sabourin Drain 2001 and the Beaulac-Beach Drain 2001.

The Tribunal issued a preliminary order determining that the review would be conducted by way of an oral hearing, focusing on the seven points raised by the engineer, and invited parties to make written submissions regarding this provisional order.

The appellant appealed Agricorp's decision to deny his crop insurance claim for his 2003 cucumber crop.

The appellant argued he was promised coverage for both fresh and processing markets, but the policy only covered contracted processor acreage, which he overfilled.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant violated the policy by failing to report damage in a timely manner and by destroying the crop before Agricorp could inspect it to verify an insured peril.

Georgian Bay Milk Company Ltd. appealed a decision of the Dairy Farmers of Ontario denying its request to extend the transition period for its non-quota holding producers to continue shipping export milk without quota.

The appellant sought an extension until a national dairy export system was established and BSE border closures were resolved.

The Tribunal denied the appeal for an indefinite extension, finding that a parallel milk marketing system would be detrimental to the quota-based system.

However, recognizing the impact of the BSE crisis, the Tribunal extended the transition period to July 31, 2004, after which the producers must comply with the minimum quota requirement.

The appellant, a dairy farmer, appealed a non Grade A penalty assessed by the Director of Regulatory Compliance for non-compliance with raw milk quality regulations.

The penalty was imposed after inspections revealed structural issues and dirty animals on the farm.

The Tribunal found that while the structural issues were resolved, the farm did not meet the cleanliness standards for cows and the heifer barn set out in Regulation 761 under the Milk Act on the relevant inspection dates.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellants, a group of dairy farmers, appealed a decision of the Dairy Farmers of Ontario regarding its over-quota milk payment policy.

In a pre-hearing motion, the appellants sought to have the Tribunal adopt the Rules of Civil Procedure to hear the appeal as a class action suit.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that it derives its jurisdiction solely from its enabling statutes and has no inherent or statutory jurisdiction to entertain class action suits.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board to seize and destroy carryover tobacco and tobacco grown in 2003.

The Tribunal found that the carryover tobacco grown under a sharegrower arrangement could not be marketed because the quota holders had sold their quota.

The Tribunal also found that the 2003 tobacco was grown without a licence and without basic production quota.

The Tribunal ordered that all carryover tobacco, except for 7,400 lbs., and all tobacco grown in 2003 be destroyed.

The appellants, dairy farmers who had sold milk on the export market prior to the termination of the Export Contract Exchange, appealed decisions of the Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) to cancel their licences to market milk and cease pick-up of their milk.

The DFO had required all producers to hold a minimum of 5 kg of milk quota, which the appellants failed to acquire.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding that the DFO treated the appellants no differently than other producers holding less than 5 kg of quota, did not induce them to sell their quota, and that allowing them to ship over-quota milk to the DFO would result in a negative return.

The appellant filed an appeal regarding a crop insurance claim more than a year after filing the proof of loss.

At a pre-hearing conference, the respondent moved to dismiss the appeal as out of time and alternatively sought an indefinite adjournment because the appellant was under police investigation for fraud related to the claim.

The Tribunal adjourned the decision on the time limit extension to the full hearing panel and granted a postponement of the hearing pending the outcome of the criminal investigation.

The appellants appealed the decision of the Court of Revision and the Engineer's Report regarding the Hambly-Sabourin and Beaulac-Beach Municipal Drains.

The Tribunal considered the appropriate level of repair, the status of the unrepaired portion, the scope of work at a crossing, the diversion of water, the assessment of costs, and the calculation of allowances.

The Tribunal ordered that the lower 437 m of the drain not be abandoned, adjusted the proportion of statutory benefit to outlet liability, required individual assessment of properties, and directed that the appropriate share of the Quebec lands be assessed to Her Majesty in Right of the Province of Ontario.

The appellant, International Dairy Direct - Broker Agent (IDDBA), appealed a decision by the Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) refusing to endorse IDDBA's proposed milk export plan.

The DFO had re-regulated the Ontario dairy industry to comply with a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling against subsidized Canadian milk exports.

IDDBA sought approval for a plan to broker over-quota milk for export to the United States.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the proposed plan was not clearly defined, lacked firm agreements, and would negatively impact Ontario's supply management system by encouraging over-quota production.

International Dairy Direct – Broker Agent (IDDBA) appealed a decision of the Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) refusing to endorse IDDBA's proposed milk export plan.

IDDBA sought to export over-quota milk to the United States in compliance with a World Trade Organization ruling.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the proposed plan would negatively impact Ontario's supply management system, was not clearly defined, and that the DFO's refusal was not prejudicial or inconsistent with its policies.

The appellants appealed the decision of the Court of Revision and the Engineer's Report regarding a municipal drain.

In a previous interim order, the Tribunal added the Province of Ontario as a party representing property owners in Quebec.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Food submitted that the Tribunal lacked authority to do so.

The Tribunal affirmed its interim decision and ordered the parties to file written submissions on the proper method of assessing the costs of the drainage works attributable to lands in Quebec.

The appellant, a tobacco grower, appealed decisions of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board denying his requests to extend the deadline for kiln conversion grants, to rent out 100% of his 2002 marketing quota, and to reverse the reduction of his 2002 marketing quota.

The appellant argued that a financial dispute involving his parents' farm prevented him from planting a crop and converting his kilns on time.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding that the appellant was treated no differently than other growers, the financial dispute was foreseeable, and the Board's rationale for restricting quota rentals to active growers was reasonable.

The appellants appealed a decision of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board denying their request for an exemption from a regulation requiring tobacco kilns to be located on the grower's own land to be eligible for a provincial conversion rebate.

The appellants sought the rebate for kilns located on a farm owned by a family member.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the eligibility criteria were published, applied consistently, and were not unreasonable.

The appellants appealed Agricorp's denial of their crop insurance claims for replanting black tobacco crops.

Agricorp denied the claims on the basis that an insured peril was not established, the crops were replanted without prior consent, and in one case, replanted after the deadline.

The Tribunal found that excessive moisture, an insured peril, caused the damage.

The Tribunal also found that the processor's consent was not required, the adjuster's comments could be interpreted as permission to replant, and the planting deadline should be extended for one appellant due to Agricorp's delay.

The Tribunal ordered Agricorp to pay the claims.

The County of Oxford appealed the assessments made against County Road 59 in the Engineer's Report for the Donaldson and Hallock Drains 2001.

The County argued that the assessments for benefit were disproportionate to the actual benefit received by the road.

The Tribunal found that the engineer's report did not sufficiently detail the method of assessments and that the amount assessed to the County for Branch A of the Donaldson Drain was excessive.

The Tribunal ordered a reduction in the County's assessment by $7,780 and redistributed this amount among the direct benefiting lots to allow the drainage works to proceed without delay.