Summitt Energy Management Inc. appealed an Ontario Energy Board order imposing a $234,000 administrative penalty, a compliance order, and restitution to consumers for unfair door-to-door sales practices.
Summitt argued reasonable apprehension of bias, incorrect standard of proof, lack of jurisdiction for restitution, and procedural unfairness.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board's independent legal counsel did not create bias, the proceedings were regulatory (requiring a civil standard of proof), and the Board had broad statutory authority to order restitution.
