OACRB 2018

The appellant appealed an order by the OSPCA removing 89 chickens and 7 dogs from his care.

The parties reached a settlement at a case conference where the appellant surrendered the animals, the OSPCA revoked the removal order, and the appellant agreed to pay care costs.

The appellant later sought a hearing, and the OSPCA moved to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and abuse of process.

The Animal Care Review Board found it retained jurisdiction only over costs, but dismissed the appeal without a hearing because the appellant's remaining issues were frivolous and allowing the appeal would undermine the settlement process.

The OSPCA removed animals from the appellant's home and issued a Notice of Removal.

The appellant filed an appeal after the five-day statutory appeal period had expired.

The Board held that the five-day appeal period under section 17(1) of the OSPCA Act is a jurisdictional requirement, not a procedural one, meaning the Board has no discretion to extend it.

Although the Board found that the appeal period did not begin to run until the appellant had effective notice of her rights due to language barriers and emotional distress, the appeal was still filed out of time.

The motion was granted and the appeal could not proceed.

The appellant's seven cats were removed by the OSPCA.

The appellant filed an appeal to the Animal Care Review Board four business days after the statutory deadline and requested an extension of time on compassionate grounds.

The Board held that it is a creature of statute and the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act does not grant it the authority to extend the time limit for bringing an appeal.

The motion for an extension of time was denied and the appeal could not proceed.