3109-99-R International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Local 6, Applicant v. Marathon-Delco Inc., Marathon Construction Services (1991) Inc., 245 Ouellette Ave. Investments Ltd., 608322 Ontario Inc., Al Fanelli Construction Co. Ltd., 308237 Ontario Limited, Marathon Construction Inc., 782647 Ontario Limited, Mario Mancini Contractors Ltd., Responding Parties.
BEFORE: Gail Misra, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. G. Knight and G. McMenemy.
DECISION OF THE BOARD; August 22, 2000
The applicant has written a letter to the Board dated August 22, 2000 regarding the pre-hearing production of documents. Counsel on behalf of some of the responding parties filed submissions with the Board in response to the applicant’s August 22nd letter. In a decision dated August 11, 2000 a different panel of the Board dealt with the applicant’s earlier request for production of documents.
It appears that the applicant is complaining that it is not receiving production from some of the responding parties; that some responding parties are not complying with the Board’s Rules and the earlier decision; and that it has not received production of documents that were not ordered produced, but which the applicant had asked be produced.
The Board does not make orders “compelling the responding parties to produce” documents where it has already made an order regarding production. If the applicant is of the view that the responding parties are in contempt of the Board’s order, it may take the necessary steps to address that matter. To the extent that any responding party is in breach of the Board’s Rules of Procedure, that matter may be raised by the applicant before the panel hearing the case.
The applicant is also seeking to have the Board order the responding parties to produce copies of the documents it had requested in paragraphs 11 and 14 of the applicant’s July 31, 2000 letter to the responding parties. It appears that although the Board considered that letter in making its production order, it did not order production of the documents listed in paragraphs 11 and 14. Having reviewed those paragraphs, the Board is of the view that it is appropriate to order the responding parties to make available for review by the applicant forthwith the following documents:
a) copies of all invoices issued to any and all of the responding parties in this matter, along with any and all cancelled cheques issued to pay those invoices; and
b) copies of all credit applications made by all of the responding parties to their respective suppliers.
Since the applicant has been informed by Marathon Delco Inc. that it does not employ anyone, but subcontracts all work, the applicant is seeking production of all relevant bids, tenders and subcontracts, whether submitted by the responding parties or received by the responding parties. It is also seeking production of all contracts, invoices and purchase orders, and payments as between the responding parties. The applicant claims to have requested this documentation in its July 31, 2000 letter to the responding party, which as noted earlier, was considered by the Board when making the August 11th decision.
The Board is of the view that the production request is too broad. The Board has already made a production order that covers some of what is being requested. However, to the extent that Marathon Delco Inc. has indicated it has no employees, but subcontracts all its work, it is necessary to make a further order. The Board therefore orders Marathon Delco Inc. to forthwith make available the following documents for review by the applicant:
a) all relevant bids, tenders and subcontracts submitted by the other responding parties to Marathon Delco, or received by the other responding parties from Marathon Delco; and
b) all relevant contracts, invoices, purchase orders and payments made between Marathon Delco and the other responding parties regarding the subcontracting of work.
- This panel is not seized.
“Gail Misra”
for the Board