Paul Gillen

The appellant, Georgian Bay Milk Company, appealed decisions by the Dairy Farmers of Ontario and the Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission that effectively shut down its export milk business following a WTO ruling against Canada's commercial export milk mechanism.

The Tribunal found that the WTO did not rule on whether non-quota holders were subsidized and ordered the DFO and OFPMC to submit the appellant's proposed unsubsidized export milk program to the federal government for review.

The Tribunal also granted the appellant an interim exemption to continue operating and allowed its milk to be transported in segregated trucks.

The Municipality of Thames Centre requested a review of the Tribunal's previous decision regarding the Walker Drain Improvement.

The Tribunal considered three alternative routes for the drain.

It ordered the drain to be reconstructed generally along its original route (Alternative C), finding it to be the lowest cost functional solution.

The Tribunal also ordered the engineer to vary the assessment methodology, allocating 35-40% of statutory benefit to roads and 60-65% to residential lands, and allowed direct appeals to the Tribunal from the revised engineer's report.

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 Municipality of Thames Centre requested a review of the Tribunal's previous decision regarding the Walker Drain Improvement project, citing new evidence about utility lines and costs that made the Tribunal's ordered route more expensive.

The Tribunal heard evidence from the municipality's engineer and several assessed landowners.

Finding the evidence insufficient to justify altering the route without further investigation, the Tribunal adjourned the hearing and ordered the engineer to provide detailed plans, cost estimates, and consultation reports for alternative routes before making a final determination.

Several assessed landowners appealed the engineer's report for the Walker Drain Improvement under section 48 of the Drainage Act.

The appellants argued that the proposed route for the drain relocation was not optimal and that the assessment of costs was unfair.

The Tribunal ordered the engineer's report to be referred back to the engineer to redesign the drain along an alternative route proposed by the appellants' engineer, which more closely aligned with the existing drain and minimized property damage.

The Tribunal also ordered modifications to the assessment methodology, adjusting the allocation of statutory benefits between roads and residential lands.

The Wine Council of Ontario and several winery growers appealed decisions of the Ontario Grape Growers' Marketing Board regarding substantial increases in license fees for the 2001 vintage year.

The appellants sought the release of the Board's budget, a reversal of the fee increases, and the withdrawal of late payment penalties and interest on withheld fees.

The Tribunal found that the Board acted within its authority to increase fees and was not obligated to release its confidential budget.

The Tribunal partially granted the appeal regarding penalties, ordering that the 5% penalty be applied to outstanding fees but staying the 2% monthly interest until April 15, 2002.

Sunnybrook Farms appealed a decision by the Chicken Farmers of Ontario (CFO) refusing to hold a hearing regarding Sunnybrook's entitlement to a periodic allocation base of 100,000 kilograms of chicken for slaughter.

Sunnybrook argued it had never relinquished its 100,000 kg base allocation established under the 1996 system, while the CFO contended the request was untimely under the 1998 system.

The Tribunal granted the appeal, finding that the definition of supply in the 1996 policy was ambiguous and that Sunnybrook, as a non-member of processor organizations, relied on the CFO to represent its interests.

The Tribunal ordered the CFO to hold a hearing into Sunnybrook's entitlement.

The appellants appealed the decision of the Ontario Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers' Marketing Board to close the Tillsonburg Auction Exchange and market the 2001 tobacco crop exclusively through the Delhi Exchange.

The appellants argued the decision was unreasonable, procedurally unfair, and based on political bias rather than economic efficiencies.

The Tribunal found that the Board's decision was based on a consideration of a range of economic factors, including efficiencies, broad economic impact, and political capital.

The Tribunal concluded the Board did not err in its procedure or make an unfair decision, and dismissed the appeal.

Several landowners appealed the decision of the Court of Revision and the Engineer's Report regarding the Balls Drain 2000 in the Township of Blandford-Blenheim.

The appellants argued that the proposed drainage works were too costly, the drain was over-designed, and the assessments were unfair.

The Tribunal found that the construction of the drain was warranted and the design was appropriate.

However, the Tribunal amended some of the assessments, finding that a benefit assessment should be applied to the property obtaining a new legal outlet.

The Tribunal also penalized the engineer in costs for failing to include the methodology and rationale for the assessments in the report.

The appellants appealed the quality of construction of the Fekete Drain under section 64 of the Drainage Act, raising concerns about the drain's location, tree removal, topsoil stripping, and spoil bank depth.

The Tribunal found the Municipality failed to properly consult the appellants on the drain's location as previously ordered, awarding $3,000 in compensation.

The Tribunal also ordered the Municipality to level the spoil bank to the specified maximum depth of 0.6 metres and install swales to prevent water ponding, but dismissed claims regarding topsoil replacement and brush stacking.

The Turkey Committee of the Ontario Poultry Processors' Association appealed a decision of the Ontario Turkey Producers' Marketing Board regarding the live prices of broiler, hen, and tom turkeys.

The Committee sought a reduction in prices due to declining energy costs and high storage stocks, while the Board argued that producers had not fully recovered from previous high energy costs.

The Tribunal accepted the Committee's proposal, ordering the Board to rescind Pricing Order 292, maintain the price of tom turkeys at the previous order's level, and reduce the price of hen and broiler turkeys by 2 cents/kg.

The appellants, insured against drought under an area-based forage crop insurance plan, brought a preliminary motion for discovery of information regarding the environmental data and methodology used in the respondent's computer simulation (SYMFOY).

The appellants sought data from specific weather stations to verify the accuracy of the simulation that denied their 1999 hay crop claims.

The Tribunal granted the motion in part, ordering the respondent to provide a map of the insurance area, a list of substations used for data substitution, and average growing season values for the years 1990-1999.

Three landowners appealed the engineer's report and the Court of Revision's decision regarding the proposed Cook-Leddy Municipal Drain.

The appellants raised concerns about the necessity of the drain, the location of the outlet, potential pollution of a farm pond, and the apportionment of assessments.

The Tribunal found that the drain was necessary to address excess water and provide a legal outlet.

It declined to relocate the outlet downstream of the pond due to the substantial additional costs that would result.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals regarding the drain's construction and outlet location, but set aside the Court of Revision's decision and adjusted the assessments for two of the properties.