Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal
Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
Appeal Tribunal
1Stone Road West
Tribunal d’appel de l’agriculture, de l’alimentation et des affaires rurales
1 Stone Road West
Guelph, (Ontario) N1G 4Y2
Tel: (519) 826-3433, Fax: (519) 826-4232
Email: AFRAAT@ontario.ca
Guelph (Ontario) N1G 4Y2
Tél.: (519) 826-3433, Téléc.: (519) 826-4232
Email: AFRAAT@ontario.ca
AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS APPEAL TRIBUNAL
APPEAL:
Denby et al. v Dairy Farmers of Ontario
Denby et al. v DFO [July 14 Pre-Hearing Conference] 2003 ONAFRAAT 19
STATUTE:
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Act
HEARING:
DATE OF DECISION:
July 14, 2003
2003-19
NEUTRAL CITATION:
2003 ONAFRAAT 19
Denby et al. v Dairy Farmers of Ontario [July 14 Pre-Hearing Conference]
IN THE MATTER OF THE MILK ACT AND SECTION 16 OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS ACT.
AND IN THE MATTER OF: An appeal to the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal by Mrs. Betty Denby, Mr. John Denby and Mr. William Denby and by Mrs. Isobel Hope and Mr. Dave Hope and by Mr. Dale McFeeters, Darmar Farms Inc. from decisions of the Dairy Farmers of Ontario by which it:
Cancelled the appellants’ licences to engage in the producing and marketing of milk (Licence Nos. 585343, 604984 and 621561)
Cancelled quota fixed and allotted to the appellants (10 kg Denby #585343, 5 kg Hope #604984 and 5 kg Darmar Farms Inc. #621561)
Required remaining quota held by the appellants to be offered for sale or sold on the June 2003 or July 2003 quota exchanges.
Cancel any quota not sold by the conclusion of the July 2003 quota exchange.
Prevent the accumulation of production credits for the use of the appellants.
AND IN THE MATTER OF: A pre-hearing conference for the purpose of:
Identification and simplification of issues.
Identification of facts or evidence that may be agreed upon.
Settlement of some of the issues in dispute.
Exploring the possibility of obtaining admissions which may facilitate the hearing.
Determining the estimated duration of the hearing.
Discussing the exchange of information and exchange of documentation.
Before:
Terry Denison, Vice Chair; Elwood Quaile, Member.
Appearances:
Donald R. Good, counsel to the appellants Betty, John and William Denby, Isobel and Dave Hope, and Dale McFeeters, Darmar Farms Inc. Geoffrey P. Spurr, counsel to the respondent, Dairy Farmers of Ontario.
MEMORANDUM ARISING FROM A PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Identification and Simplification of Issues
Parties agreed that the key issues in dispute were:
The question of whether or not the regulation which the appellants are alleged to have contravened was stayed by virtue of appeals made to the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal.
The question of whether or not the penalties assessed by the Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) were appropriate under the circumstances and whether or not the DFO misled any or all of the appellants with regard to an Undertaking they signed.
Identification of Facts or Evidence that May be Agreed Upon
Mr. Good indicated that his clients did not dispute the facts contained in materials which were submitted at their hearing before the DFO. Mr. Spurr indicated that was helpful as he could call fewer witnesses as a result.
Mr. Good indicated he would call the appellants as witnesses and may call additional witnesses. Mr. Spurr indicated he would call one witness to address the documentary evidence and one or two other witnesses. The parties agreed to produce lists of witnesses and "will say" statements no later than 10 days before the commencement of the hearing.
Settlement of Some of the Issues in Dispute
Mr. Good indicating he would not be relying on subsection 4 of Section 7 of the federal regulations “The Dairy Products Marketing Regulations” under the Canadian Dairy Commission Act.
The parties agreed to try to reach agreement as to the effective dates of DFO regulations.
The parties also agreed they would attempt to settle the dispute but that negotiations would be ‘without prejudice’.
Exploring the Possibility of Obtaining Admissions which May Facilitate the Hearing.
No admissions were obtained.
Determining the Estimated Duration of the Hearing
The parties agreed that three or four days should be sufficient time to complete the hearing.
Discussing the Exchange of Information and Exchange of Documentation
The parties agreed that any documents in their clients’ possession which related to the dispute and which were generated in the months of March 2003, April 2003 and May 2003 that had not yet been disclosed would be disclosed by Tuesday, September 2, 2003.
The parties agreed that any documentary evidence to be submitted in reply to the above would be filed with the other party by Monday, September 8, 2003.
ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
After careful consideration of the submissions made the Tribunal orders:
By Tuesday, September 2, 2003 the parties shall deliver to the other parties two copies of any documents in their clients’ possession which relate to the dispute and which were generated in the months of March 2003, April 2003 and May 2003 and which have not yet been disclosed to the other parties.
By Friday, September 5, 2003 the parties shall deliver to the other parties two copies of a list of witnesses intended to be called at the hearing and two copies of a "will say" statement for each witness.
By Monday, September 8, 2003 the parties shall deliver to each other party two copies of all relevant documentary evidence and other materials of any kind whatsoever intended to be filed at the hearing as an exhibit. The presentation of the parties may be included if desired.
By Monday, September 8, 2003, seven copies of all relevant documentary evidence and materials of any kind whatsoever intended to be filed at the hearing as an exhibit shall be delivered to the Tribunal by each of the parties. The presentation of the parties may be included if desired.
DATED at Toronto, Ontario the 14^th^ day of July, 2003