Type: Decision
-
Decision: Eggstream Farms Ltd. v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
Appeal of BCEMB’s decision to deny a request to reinstate a withdrawn appeal concerning TRLQ allocation. Eggstream Farms Ltd. argued that the BCEMB’s actions frustrated a mediated settlement and sought to adjudicate the issue. The decision was related to the administration of the TRLQ program.
-
Preliminary Decision: Elkview Enterprises Ltd. v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
The preliminary decision addresses whether the appeal should be dismissed as “frivolous, vexatious or trivial”. The appeal concerns a challenge to the BCEMB’s decision regarding the amendment of its Temporary Restricted Licence Quota Permit.
-
Decision: Delight v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
Appeal of BCEMB’s seizure decision to enforce orders. The appellants contested the seizure of layers, arguing against the authority and notification process.
-
Consent Order: Delight v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
The British Columbia Marketing Board issued a consent order extending the deadline for the appellants to maintain up to 2400 layers from December 31, 1989, to January 31, 1990, while keeping all other aspects of the original decision unchanged.
-
Decision: Cedardale Poultry Ranch Ltd. v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
Appeal of BCEMB’s decision to deny levy abatement. Cedardale Poultry Ranch Ltd. sought abatement due to flock cycle adjustment requested by its buyer, Lucerne Foods Ltd. The decision was related to the BCEMB’s Uniform Levy System policy.
-
Decision: Delight v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
Appeal of BCEMB’s decision to enforce an order for the seizure and disposal of layers. The decision was related to an order of the British Columbia Marketing Board dated June 6, 1989, and a Consent Order of December 22, 1989.
-
Decision: Delight v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
Appeal of BCEMB’s decision to authorize the seizure and disposal of layers exceeding the allowable unregulated limit.
-
Decision: Pottruff v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
Digital copy of decision regarding appeal of BCEMB’s decision to seize a flock due to alleged non-compliance with the BCEMB’s Standing Orders.
-
Decision: Anderson v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
Appeal of BCEMB’s decision to charge levies to the appellants. The appellants argued against paying market licensing fees, claiming lack of representation and benefits.
-
Decision: Pottruff v. British Columbia Egg Marketing Board
Appeal of BCEMB’s decision concerning a flock seizure. Pottruff challenged the seizure of his flock due to alleged special circumstances, including the BCEMB’s prior awareness and implicit permission of his activities. The decision was related to the BCEMB’s Standing Orders and the management of specialty egg production.