Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal 1 Stone 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: Ontario Independent Poultry Processors v Chicken Farmers of Ontario
Ontario Independent Poultry Processors v CFO 2014ONAFRAAT25
STATUTE: Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Act
HEARING: September 15, 2014
DATE OF DECISION: September 22, 2014
2014-25
NEUTRAL CITATION: 2014 ONAFRAAT 25
Ontario Independent Poultry Processors v Chicken Farmers of Ontario
IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 16 OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS ACT, R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER M.16, AS AMENDED.
AND IN THE MATTER OF: An Appeal to the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal from the Ontario Independent Poultry Processors by Mr. John Slot from the Chicken Farmers of Ontario in which the board denied the request to implement the CFO Specialty Chicken Policy No. 199-2013 as it is currently configured.
Before: Harold McNeely, Vice-Chair Glenn Walker, Vice-Chair Richard Smelski, Member
Appearances: John Slot, representing the Appellant, Ontario Independent Poultry Processors Geoff Spurr, Counsel for the Respondent, Chicken Farmers of Ontario Herman Turkstra, Counsel for Association of Ontario Chicken Processors, Party to the Appeal
DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL
Background
This appeal was originally scheduled for July 14, 2014 at which time; it was adjourned until September 15, 2014. At the commencement of the hearing, the Tribunal was advised that Chicken Farmers of Ontario (CFO) had recently enacted a new Specialty Chicken Policy No. 207-2014 and this policy was made Exhibit #1 to the hearing.
Ontario Independent Poultry Processors (OIPP) submitted that notwithstanding the enactment of the new policy, which revoked Policy No. 199-2013, the Appellant wished to continue with the hearing. OIPP was of the opinion that the new policy was only a partial replacement of the previous policy and that there was no need to revoke the existing policy but that the previous policy could have been modified. Mr. Slot, on behalf of OIPP, stated that a number of its members had suffered irreparable damage as a result of the previous Policy No. 199-2013 not having been implemented.
On the other hand, the Association of Ontario Chicken Processors (AOCP) and CFO both argue that this appeal must be dismissed since the policy that is the subject of the appeal has now been revoked. They believe that the proper procedure is for OIPP to request CFO to reconsider Policy No. 207-2014 and, if unsatisfied with that decision, then to appeal that decision to the Tribunal.
Analysis and Discussion
This appeal is authorized under subsection 16(1)(2) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Act, R.S.O. 1990, ch. M.16, as amended. That subsection states: “Subject to subsections (4) and (5), a person who is aggrieved by any of the following orders, directions, decisions, policies or regulation made under the Farm Products Marketing Act and the Milk Act may appeal the matter to the Tribunal:…2. any order, direction, decision, policy or regulation made by a local board or marketing board.”
Subsection 16(5) provides that no appeal may be taken from a policy of a marketing board unless the appellant has first applied to the marketing board for a hearing and the marketing board has refused to grant in whole or in part the relief requested by the Appellant. It also provides that the Appellant and the marketing board may waive their respective rights to a hearing before the marketing board in writing.
It is clear that the Appellant brought this appeal from Policy No. 199-2013. That policy no longer exists. The Tribunal cannot simply substitute Policy No. 207-2014 for Policy No. 199-2013 as the OIPP must first of all apply to CFO for a hearing with respect to the new Policy No. 207-2014. That hearing has not been waived by the parties.
Consequently, it is the opinion of this Tribunal that it no longer has jurisdiction to continue this appeal.
Order of the Tribunal
The Tribunal hereby orders that the Appeal is dismissed.
Dated at Ottawa, Ontario this 22nd day of September, 2014.