Prepare for a regulated marketing appeal hearing

A regulated marketing appeal hearing is your chance to explain why a regulated marketing board or commission’s decision should be changed. A B.C. Farm Industry Review Board (BCFIRB) panel will listen to both sides and review the evidence. After the hearing, they will send a written decision.

Hearings follow a structured process but are less formal than court. You are allowed legal representation, but you don’t need legal training to take part.

BCFIRB hears appeals under the Natural Products Marketing (BC) Act (NPMA).

Disclaimer

This guide is not legal advice. It’s meant to help you understand the hearing process. It does not cover every situation and may not reflect the specifics of your appeal. You are responsible for understanding the rules and meeting all requirements. For legal guidance, consider speaking with a lawyer.

Hearing rules and procedures

Before your hearing, read the Rules of practice and procedure for NPMA appeals (PDF, 251KB).

It outlines critical details you need to understand to properly prepare and participate in the appeal.

It includes:

When to submit documents and evidence
What happens if you miss deadlines
How BCFIRB conducts hearings, including the order of speaking, questioning witnesses, and making arguments
How to protect your rights, request privacy, summon witnesses, or handle unexpected issues during the hearing

Where and when the hearing takes place

The hearing will be held at a date, time, and location determined at the pre-hearing conference call (PHC).

Hearings are usually held in person, but BCFIRB may decide to hold them electronically or in writing. If the hearing is written, BCFIRB will give you directions for how and when to submit your materials.

Public access and recording

Hearings are generally open to the public, unless BCFIRB decides otherwise. If you want part or all of the hearing to be private, you must make a written request in advance. The written request should be made with enough time for BCFIRB to process the request prior to the hearing.

Only BCFIRB may record a hearing. You are not allowed to record or photograph it. If the hearing is recorded, you can request a transcript at your own expense and must arrange it directly with the court reporter.

Who can participate

A panel of one or more BCFIRB members leads the hearing
The appellant and the respondent can present evidence, make arguments and call witnesses
Interveners can participate, but only to the extent allowed by BCFIRB

What the hearing will cover

The hearing will only deal with matters listed in your Notice of Appeal and confirmed at the pre-hearing conference.

What happens during the hearing

Hearings typically follow these steps:

Opening statements: Each party briefly summarizes their case
Presenting evidence: Parties present documents, testimony or other supporting information
Questioning witnesses: Both parties and the panel may ask witnesses questions
Closing arguments: Each party explains why the decision should or should not be changed

At each step, the order of presentation is:

Appellant
Respondent
Interveners (if applicable)

The panel can change the process as needed to ensure fairness and efficiency.

Step 1: Opening statements

Before starting, the panel chair introduces everyone, outlines your appeal, and explains the legal basis for BCFIRB’s involvement.

You (the appellant) will give your opening statement first. The respondent (regulated marketing board or commission) will then give theirs. If an intervener has been approved, they may or may not give an opening statement, depending on their level of participation.

Your opening should briefly preview your case. Clearly state:

What decision you are appealing
The main reasons you believe it should be changed
What evidence you plan to present
The outcome you want from BCFIRB

This is a preview, not a persuasion. You’re helping the panel understand what to expect, not trying to convince them yet.

Avoid arguing your case, challenging the board’s reasoning, or interpreting the evidence. That comes later.

Good example

“I’m appealing the BC Milk Marketing Board’s decision to deny my request to transfer quota to my brother.

The board cited non-compliance with Section 3.2 of the Quota Transfer Policy, but I believe the transfer meets the policy requirements.

During this hearing, I’ll present documents showing our family relationship, past approvals in similar cases, and the timeline of the request.

I’m asking BCFIRB to reverse the board’s decision and approve the quota transfer.”

Poor example

“I’m appealing the decision the board made.

The board misunderstood their policy. They claim we didn’t meet the family relationship criteria, but we clearly do.

In Case X, the same kind of transfer was approved, so denying mine shows they’re being inconsistent. Here’s a document showing my proof.

My production numbers have been steady for five years, so any suggestion that I’m not in good standing is just wrong.”

Step 2: Presenting evidence

You will present your evidence first. The respondent goes next, followed by any interveners (if BCFIRB permits them to present).

This is your chance to walk the panel through each document, photo or piece of testimony you’re using to support your case. Learn more about choosing evidence.

All evidence must be:

Organized and numbered
Copied for all parties, panel members, the court reporter and witnesses
Disclosed before the hearing, unless BCFIRB allows it to be submitted late
Presented under oath or affirmation

For each item, explain:

What it is (letter from the board, sales invoice, photograph)
When it was created or received
What it shows and why it’s relevant to the issue
Who can verify or explain it further if needed

Stay factual. Don’t tell the panel what the evidence “proves”, as that happens during your closing argument.

Each side can ask questions about the other’s evidence. The panel may also ask questions. BCFIRB encourages parties to agree on shared facts, where possible, to reduce time and cost.

Good examples

Documents
“This letter from the board, dated July 2, shows they told me the deadline was July 15. But in their decision, they say I missed a July 10 deadline. This shows that I received incorrect information.”
Photograph
“This photo shows the condition of the shipment when it arrived at my farm. I took the picture myself just after unloading on April 2 at 3:22 pm.”
Testimony
“On February 10, I spoke with a board representative by phone. They told me my application looked complete and would be reviewed the following week.”

Poor example

“This policy clearly says quota transfers between family members are allowed. The board misread it, and my case obviously meets the criteria. They ignored this section completely.”

Jumps into interpreting the policy
Argues that the board made a mistake (which belongs in closing)
Tells the panel what to think, instead of letting them draw conclusions based on the evidence

Step 3: Questioning witnesses

You can call witnesses to explain facts relevant to your case. You question your witness first, followed by the respondent, and then the panel. You will also be able to question (cross-examine) the respondent’s witnesses.

Your goal is to clearly present the facts through your witnesses’ testimony:

Start by briefly introducing your witness, their role and why their testimony matters
Ask open-ended questions that allow your witness to fully describe events
Avoid yes/no questions, except to confirm simple facts
Avoid leading questions that imply answers

Good examples

“Could you please state your name and explain your role on my farm?”
“Were you present during the inspection on May 15?”
“Please describe exactly what the inspector requested during that visit.”
“What documents did you provide to the inspector at that time?”

Poor example

“Did the board ignore your documents?” is a leading question
- Instead, you could try: “What was the board’s response to your documents?”

Cross-examining the other party’s witnesses

When the respondent’s witnesses testify, you will have the opportunity to cross-examine them.

Take notes during their testimony. You can request a break to prepare questions if needed.

Your goal in cross-examination is to:

Clarify information
Highlight inconsistencies
Test the reliability of their testimony

Keep your questions clear, concise, and focused:

“Earlier, you said the inspection was completed on April 2. Can you clarify why the inspection report is dated April 5?”

Step 4: Closing arguments

Your closing argument is your final opportunity to explain why the decision should be changed. You go first, followed by the respondent and any interveners. The panel may allow you to briefly respond if new issues are raised.

Your closing argument should focus on:

What the evidence shows
Briefly remind the panel of the strongest evidence supporting your case. Do not reintroduce all details, just focus on the most persuasive facts.
Why the original decision is incorrect or unfair
Clearly state how the evidence shows the original decision was incorrect, inconsistent or unfair.
What outcome you are asking for
Explicitly state the decision you want BCFIRB to make (reverse, modify or send the decision back for reconsideration.)

Example of a closing argument

“Throughout this hearing, the evidence clearly showed that I met all the requirements under Section 3.2 of the Quota Transfer Policy. Specifically, the need for a direct family relationship and the timely submission of the quota transfer application. Official family records, acknowledged by the regulated marketing board, along with emailed records and testimony from my farm manager, confirmed that we submitted all required documents well before the deadline.

Despite this, the board denied the transfer, stating that our family relationship didn’t qualify. This is a misapplication of its own policy. The policy does not exclude our relationship type. As I’ve shown, the board has previously approved transfers involving the exact same relationship structure, including the March 2023 case involving a father and step-son, approved under the same section.

The board provided no explanation for treating our case differently. This raises a serious concern about inconsistent policy application, which BCFIRB has previously recognized as a valid ground for appeal. The lack of a written explanation at the time of denial also raises a procedural fairness issue. When rules are applied inconsistently without justification, affected parties cannot meaningfully respond or appeal.

This decision has significant business impacts for our farm. It limits our ability to operate efficiently and threatens our long-term stability.

In light of this, I respectfully ask BCFIRB to reverse the board’s decision and approve the quota transfer. The evidence supports that the criteria were met. The policy was misapplied, and the decision was made inconsistently. Fair, transparent, and consistent decision-making is essential, and that’s what I’m asking BCFIRB to uphold.”