Graeme Hedley

The appellants appealed the decision of the Court of Revision and the engineer's report regarding the Daniel McArthur Drain - East.

They argued that their property was assessed the largest portion of the cost despite not being eligible for agricultural grants, and objected to the proposed routing and the allowance for woodlot damage.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, finding the assessments for outlet and benefit to be fair and just, the proposed route to be the most economical, and the allowance for woodlot damage to be adequate given the lack of contrary evidence.

The appellant, an abattoir operator, appealed a decision of the Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency ordering it to pay outstanding license fees, finance charges, and a $1,000 fine, subject to a payment schedule and threat of license suspension.

The appellant argued financial hardship and disputed the slaughter numbers.

The Tribunal found the agency's slaughter data valid and upheld the requirement to remit fees, noting that bad debts from customers do not relieve the operator of its regulatory obligations.

The appeal was allowed only to the extent of correcting a $374.82 billing error agreed upon by the parties; the $1,000 fine and payment schedule were upheld.

The appellant appealed the decision of the Court of Revision regarding the Engineer's Report for the repair and improvement of a municipal drain.

The appellant argued that the proposed drainage works provided no benefit to his property and that his assessment should be reduced and offset by an increased assessment against the municipality.

The Tribunal agreed that the appellant's property did not benefit to the extent described in the report due to existing drainage.

The Tribunal ordered the benefit assessment on the appellant's property reduced by $1,700 and the assessment on the municipal road increased by the same amount.

Ruedel Farms Inc. appealed a decision by the Ontario Processing Vegetable Growers (OPVG) denying it a licence to grow carrots for processing in 2006.

Ruedel had hired Kejay, a company previously prohibited by the Tribunal from producing and marketing carrots for processing in 2006, to do custom work.

The Tribunal found that the arrangement effectively allowed Kejay to produce and market the carrots, violating the prior order.

The appeal was dismissed and the licence denial was upheld.

The appellants appealed Agricorp's decision denying a reseeding claim for 700 acres of soybeans planted in April 2005.

Agricorp argued the early planting did not constitute Good Farm Management Practice.

The Tribunal found that the appellants had extensive farming experience, planted during favourable soil conditions, and that Agricorp had unilaterally decided not to cover early-planted soybeans without notifying the insured.

The Tribunal concluded the appellants engaged in Good Farm Management Practice and ordered Agricorp to pay the $42,000 reseeding claim.

Mornington Heritage Cheese and Dairy Cooperative Inc. brought a motion to lift the stay of a Deputy Director's decision that amended its licence to allow processing of cow's milk.

The stay was in place due to an appeal by the Ontario Dairy Council.

The Tribunal denied the motion to lift the stay, finding that the appeal should be heard before cow's milk processing commences, as the decision significantly impacts the parties and the hearing date was imminent.

The Tribunal also granted a request to add OMAFRA as a party to the appeal.

The appellant, a tobacco grower, appealed a decision of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board denying his request for an exemption to rent out 100% of his 2005 marketing quota.

The appellant argued that deteriorating eyesight prevented him from growing a crop.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant's medical condition was not a sudden or unexpected deterioration that prevented him from arranging for a sharegrower to grow the crop.

The appellant hog producer appealed a decision of the Ontario Pork Producers’ Marketing Board denying his request for a payment adjustment on two loads of hogs shipped to Quebec instead of the U.S. The appellant argued he lost money because the Quebec processor no longer offered a heavy hog grid.

The Tribunal found that while the OPPMB was not responsible for the specific decision to ship the hogs to Quebec, it was partially responsible for failing to inform the transporter that the heavy grid was no longer available.

The Tribunal ordered the OPPMB to compensate the appellant for future losses resulting from the effect of the Quebec shipments on his rolling average index.

The appellants, tobacco growers, appealed decisions of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board (OFCTGMB) denying their requests to rent out 100% of their 2004 marketing quota and to receive funding from a quality assurance program.

The appellants had opted not to grow a crop in 2004 in anticipation of participating in a federal Tobacco Assistance Program (TAP) buyout, which was ultimately delayed.

The Tribunal found that the OFCTGMB had created an expectation regarding the TAP without adequately communicating the risks, but that the appellants also bore responsibility for their business decisions.

The Tribunal allowed the appellants to rent out 80% of their 2004 marketing quota, but dismissed the appeal regarding the quality assurance program funding, as the appellants did not grow a crop and thus did not meet the eligibility criteria.

The appellants, tobacco growers who did not plant a crop in 2004 in anticipation of participating in a federal quota buyout program, appealed a decision by the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board (OFCTGMB) that allowed them to rent out only 44% of their 2004 marketing quota.

The appellants sought to rent out 100% of their quota after the buyout program was delayed.

The Tribunal found that the OFCTGMB had actively promoted the federal program before details were finalized and did not adequately communicate the risks to growers.

Acknowledging shared responsibility between the OFCTGMB and the individual growers, the Tribunal ordered that the appellants be allowed to rent out 80% of their 2004 marketing quota.