Paul Trudell

The appellant, a mid-sized pullet growing operation, appealed a decision of the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg & Chick Commission denying its request for an exemption from Policy Direction 59.

Policy 59 revoked a grandfather clause that had previously exempted the appellant from having to obtain additional growing rights.

The Tribunal found that the Commission had engaged in a fair consultative process before adopting Policy 59 and that the appellant failed to show the policy was unfair, discriminatory, or unreasonable.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, an abattoir operator, appealed a decision of the Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency (OSMA) ordering the payment of outstanding licence fees and finance charges, along with fines and a potential licence suspension for non-payment.

The appellant argued that collecting fees from custom kill clients was difficult and would harm its business, suggesting that auction houses should collect the fees instead.

The Tribunal found that the appellant understood its obligations under OSMA regulations and that its failure to remit fees undermined the marketing system.

The Tribunal upheld the outstanding fees, finance charges, fines, and the conditional suspension of the sheep slaughtering licence.

The appellant, an abattoir operator, appealed a decision of the Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency ordering it to pay outstanding license fees, finance charges, and a $1,000 fine, subject to a payment schedule and threat of license suspension.

The appellant argued financial hardship and disputed the slaughter numbers.

The Tribunal found the agency's slaughter data valid and upheld the requirement to remit fees, noting that bad debts from customers do not relieve the operator of its regulatory obligations.

The appeal was allowed only to the extent of correcting a $374.82 billing error agreed upon by the parties; the $1,000 fine and payment schedule were upheld.

The appellant hatchery appealed a $10,000 penalty assessed by the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg and Chick Commission for 22 instances of late payments to producers and 8 violations of Commission orders.

The appellant argued the penalty was too high given its cash flow problems and pending sale of the business.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no mitigating factors to excuse the regulatory obligations and concluding the $10,000 fine was proportional to the number of infractions and consistent with past penalties.

The Maitland Valley Conservation Authority and the Attorney General for Ontario sought leave to appeal a Provincial Court decision dismissing a prosecution against the respondents for constructing a building on a swamp without written permission.

The respondents had obtained a building permit from the municipality, and the Provincial Court judge found they could successfully assert the defence of officially induced error.

The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal, finding that the legal effect of a building permit as a defence to prosecution under another Act raises a question of law of broad public significance.

The appellant, a hatching egg producer, appealed a decision by the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg and Chick Commission (OBHECC) to reduce his production potential for the 2000 and 2001 breeder placement cycle years, and challenged OBHECC's policy of averaging hatching egg production across all breeds to determine chick placements.

The appellant argued this policy created inequities due to the lower productivity of the Cobb breed he was assigned.

The Tribunal found that while a disparity in breed productivity existed, OBHECC had acted responsibly by developing a new breed indexing policy for 2002.

The Tribunal declined to make the policy retroactive or reverse the 2001 cutbacks, finding no gross inequity or unique economic hardship justifying intervention.

The appeal was denied.

The appellants, hatching egg producers, appealed a decision of the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg & Chick Commission denying them just cause to terminate a growing contract with a breeder grower.

The appellants sought to terminate the contract because the grower's facility was too small for their increased quota and they did not want a split flock.

The grower committed to renovating his barn to accommodate the larger flock.

The Tribunal found that the renovations could likely be completed in time and that there was no just cause to terminate the contract, dismissing the appeal but directing the Commission to monitor the renovations.

The appellant, Jarvis Chick Sales Inc., appealed the amount of penalties imposed by the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg and Chick Commission for late payments.

At the commencement of the hearing, the appellant's representative advised the Tribunal that the parties had reached a negotiated settlement.

Consequently, the appellant withdrew the appeal.

The Tribunal accepted the withdrawal and commended the parties for resolving the issue.