Brian Sweet

The applicant filed a complaint regarding noise, odour, vibration, drainage, and fly infestation disturbances allegedly emanating from the respondents' property.

The Board commenced a bifurcated hearing to first determine whether it had jurisdiction over the respondents' operation as an 'agricultural operation' under the Farming and Food Production Protection Act, 1998.

During the hearing, the parties reached a settlement and the applicant withdrew the complaint.

The Board ordered the application withdrawn with prejudice.

The applicant filed a complaint regarding noise, odor, vibration, drainage, and fly disturbances allegedly emanating from the respondents' property.

After mediation failed, a hearing commenced before the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board.

During the hearing, the parties reached a settlement.

The Board declined to approve the settlement details as being beyond its jurisdiction, but ordered the application withdrawn with prejudice on consent of all parties.

The Applicant, a rural non-farm resident, applied to the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board complaining of severe odours emanating from the Respondent's greenhouse composting operation.

The Respondent had recently begun composting greenhouse vine wastes and organic vegetable wastes to produce supplementary heat.

The Board found that the Applicant was directly affected by the odour disturbance.

However, recognizing the Respondent's good faith efforts to mitigate the odour and the importance of allowing farmers time to implement new technologies, the Board deferred ruling on whether the composting constituted a normal farm practice.

Instead, the Board issued an interim decision requiring the Respondent to remove stored bales, limit compost turning, obtain a consultant's report, and submit a comprehensive odour reduction plan or terminate the composting operation.

The applicant, representing several rural non-farm residents, complained of severe odours emanating from the respondent's greenhouse composting operation.

The respondent had recently begun composting greenhouse vine wastes and organic vegetable wastes to produce supplementary heat.

The Normal Farm Practices Protection Board found that the applicant was directly affected by the odour disturbance.

However, recognizing the respondent's good faith efforts to mitigate the odour and the importance of allowing farmers time to fine-tune new technologies, the Board issued an interim decision.

The respondent was ordered to remove stored bales, reduce compost turning frequency, and submit a comprehensive odour reduction plan supported by a consultant's report before the Board would make a final determination on whether the operation constituted a normal farm practice.

The appellant appealed the engineer's report and Court of Revision decision regarding the Isley Branch of the Coulson Drain under the Drainage Act.

The appellant did not object to the proposed drainage works but argued its assessment share was unfair.

The Tribunal found the engineer's 90:10 statutory benefit to outlet ratio improper and adjusted it to 75:25.

The Tribunal also varied the benefit split between the appellant and the neighbouring property from 50:50 to 40:60, recognizing the appellant already had a direct outlet to the main drain.

The appeal was allowed in part and the assessment schedule was varied accordingly.

The applicant union sought to certify a bargaining unit of firefighters working for the Municipality of Leamington.

The central issue was whether the individuals were 'volunteer firefighters' under the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, in which case the Labour Relations Act would apply, or 'firefighters', in which case it would not.

The Board found that the firefighters were regularly employed on a salaried basis and assigned to fire protection services, and thus fell within the definition of 'firefighter'.

Consequently, the Labour Relations Act did not apply, and the application for certification was dismissed.