The appellants challenged a CRTC order prohibiting simultaneous substitution during the Super Bowl, issued pursuant to s. 9(1)(h) of the Broadcasting Act.
The majority held that the applicable standard of review was correctness given the statutory appeal mechanism in s. 31(2) of the Act, and that the CRTC's authority under s. 9(1)(h) is limited to issuing mandatory carriage orders requiring television service providers to carry specific channels on specified terms — it does not confer a general power to impose conditions on the carriage of programming services outside that context.
Because the Final Order did not mandate carriage of any channel but merely imposed a condition on providers already carrying one, it exceeded the CRTC's delegated power.
The appeals were allowed and both the Final Decision and Final Order were quashed.
Abella and Karakatsanis JJ. dissented, finding reasonableness the applicable standard and the CRTC's interpretation of s. 9(1)(h) reasonable given its specialized expertise.
