3 total
Motion for document production denied as the requested risk analysis was irrelevant to the hearing de novo.
During an appeal regarding a service fee increase by the Ontario Pork Producers' Marketing Board to fund its defense of a U.S. trade action, the appellants requested an order for the production of the Board's risk analysis related to becoming a mandatory respondent.
The Tribunal denied the request, noting that the appeal is a hearing de novo and the requested information regarding the Board's decision-making process or potential mismanagement is of little use to the Tribunal's determination of the appropriateness of the fees.
Motion for production of actual litigation expenditures denied as irrelevant to appeal of budget-based service charge.
The appellants appealed a decision of the respondent marketing board to increase the service charge on hogs, which was based on budget estimates for U.S. trade litigation.
The appellants brought a motion requesting an order that the respondent produce its actual expenditures to date on the trade challenges.
The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that the actual expenditures were irrelevant to the appeal, as the original decision was based on budgeted information.
Tribunal has jurisdiction on appeal to direct the Commission to amend or revoke its regulations.
In an appeal regarding the supply management system for the chicken industry, the Association of Ontario Chicken Processors argued that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to establish a specific pricing formula or amend regulations.
The Chicken Farmers of Ontario argued that a pricing formula was essential to their proposal and that the Tribunal could direct the Commission to amend its regulations.
The Tribunal held that under section 16(11) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Act, it has the authority to direct the Commission to amend or revoke its regulations made under the Farm Products Marketing Act, as its jurisdiction is not circumscribed by the appeal triggers in section 16(1).
