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
2023 ONAFRAAT15
FILE NO.: 069Danner23
DATE: 2023/10/06
IN THE MATTER OF the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act, 1993, S.O. 1993, c. 21, AS AMENDED;
AND IN THE MATTER OF an application to the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal (“Tribunal”) by Frank John Danner of New Hamburg, Ontario pursuant to Section 22(1) of the Farm Registration and Farm Organization Funding Act.
AND IN THE MATTER OF an electronic hearing pursuant to Rule 18 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure.
Heard: September 7, 2023
Before: Robert Fuller, Vice-Chair; Sarah Judd, Member; Betty Ann MacKinnon, Member
Appearances:
Frank John Danner, Applicant
DECISION
BACKGROUND
Frank John Danner applied to the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal, by way of an application received by the Tribunal on June 19, 2023, for an order waiving the requirement that he register his farm with and make the prescribed payment to a farm organization on the basis of his religious conviction or belief pursuant to Section 22(1) of the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act, 1993 (“Act”). In his application he states that he does not argue the facts, jurisdiction, law or venue of the Act but requests his Account be closed and that he receive an exemption in accord with Public Policy. No further grounds were disclosed by his application. The Bishop Affirmation portion of the application was not completed.
In the absence of the affirmation of a bishop of a church recognized by the Tribunal as holding beliefs that would entitle church members to a religious exemption, the Tribunal ordered a hearing of the application, in accordance with Section 22(6) of the Act. The hearing was held by Zoom on September 7, 2023. The three accredited farm organizations, namely the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario and the National Farmers Union – Ontario were notified by the Tribunal and did not submit any objections to the application.
THE EVIDENCE
The Tribunal received Mr. Danner’s written submissions which were filed as Exhibit Number 1 and 2 to the hearing.
Mr. Danner has owned and operated a farm since 2012 which he received from his father. Mr. Danner has had a Farm Business Registration (FBR) Number from 2012 and has at various times since then belonged to each of the three accredited farm organizations. By letter dated May 31, 2023 from Agricorp, Mr. Danner was advised that Farm Business Registration (FBR) invoice was overdue and his FBR number was invalid. He was informed that a valid 2023 FBR number is needed to qualify for the Farm Property Class Tax Rate Program.
Mr. Danner testified that since 2012 he has not been a member of an organized Church. He testified that he saw the box allowing for an exemption for religious conviction or belief and that the growth in his belief in the gifts of G-d were a valid objection and that he owed nothing under the legislation and filing.
Mr. Danner did not object to joining or belonging to a farm organization, his only objection was to the payment of fees. Mr. Danner has never requested a refund of his fees as he was not aware he could.
Mr. Danner referred the Tribunal to various scriptural passages from the Christian Bible in support of his position. He did not provide the Tribunal with a cogent explanation of how the scriptural passages supported his request for exemption.
THE LAW
The subsections of the Act relevant to this application are:
Section 22(1)
“If an individual carries on a farming business and objects to making payment to a farm organization or filing a farming business registration form because of his or her religious conviction or belief, the individual my apply to the Tribunal for an order that payment or filing be waived.”
Section 22(6)
“If the Tribunal is satisfied that an individual referred to in subsection (1), (2) or (3) objects to making payment to a farm organization or filing a farming business registration form because of his or her genuinely held religious conviction or belief, it shall order that payment or filing be waived.”
ANALYSIS
The issue to be decided is whether the Tribunal is satisfied that Mr. Danner objects to making a payment to a farm organization or filing a farm business registration form because of his genuinely held religious conviction or belief.
In James Morin (Re), 2019 ONAFRAAT 22 set forth a three-pronged test for a religious exemption under s. 22 of the Act:
Are the Applicant’s convictions and beliefs genuinely held?
Are the Applicant’s convictions and beliefs religious?
Are the Applicant’s convictions and beliefs the actual cause of the objection to making a payment to a farm organization or filing a farm business registration form?
Genuinely Held
This is a subjective test and whether the conviction or belief is right or wrong, reasonable or unreasonable, is of little importance. What is important is that Mr. Danner genuinely holds these beliefs. The test is subjective from Mr. Danner’s point of view and can best be judged from his testimony and the manner in which he explained his convictions and beliefs.
Mr. Danner gave his evidence in a straightforward and credible manner and gave the Tribunal no reason to believe that he did not genuinely hold these convictions. The Tribunal finds that he is genuine in his belief.
Religious Beliefs
Mr. Danner stated that he was not a member of a Church however James Morin (Re) held that a religion may be personal and need not be tied to a religious sect so long as the beliefs are religious in essence.
Although Mr. Danner provided scriptural evidence, he did not, on the balance of probabilities prove that his objection to making a payment to a farm organization is religious and therefore the Tribunal finds that Mr. Danner has failed to meet the onus of proof with respect to this aspect of the test.
Actual Cause
Mr. Danner’s objection to payment of the fees were precipitated by his review of the application and he did not investigate the path of payment and refund of which he was unaware. Mr. Danner did not provide sufficient evidence of religious grounds being the cause for his objection to payment of the fees.
Although Mr. Danner may have strong religious beliefs and convictions, the Tribunal finds they are not the actual basis for this application. The Tribunal finds that the Applicant has failed to meet the onus on this branch of the test.
Conclusion
In order to be successful, the applicant must convince the Tribunal on all three branches of the test. He has failed to do so.
The Tribunal would encourage Mr. Danner to investigate the path of refund of payments to a farm organization within the specified time period going forward. The Tribunal would refer Mr. Danner to Section 21 of the Act.
ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
The Tribunal orders that the Application of Frank John Danner under Section 22(1) of the Act be dismissed.
Dated at Simcoe, this 6^th^ day of October, 2023.
Released: October 6, 2023