Category: Regulated marketing appeal
-
Decision: Skye Hi Farms Inc., Casey Van Ginkel DBA V3 Farms and Wilhelm Friesen & Lillian Fehr DBA W. Friesen Enterprises v British Columbia Broiler Hatching Egg Commission
Appeal of BCBHEC’s regulatory decision to enact Amending Order 11 and allot quota under the Regularization of Historically Non-compliant Silkie and Taiwanese Producers Program. Appellants argued the program failed to provide sufficient quota, undermined existing businesses, and was procedurally flawed.
-
Decision: teBrinke d.b.a. Mountainview Acres v. British Columbia Chicken Marketing Board
Appeal of BCCMB’s decision to impose an overmarketing levy and license suspension for period A-136.
-
Decision: Wingtat Game Bird Packers v British Columbia Chicken Marketing Board
Appeal of BCCMB’s decision deeming a chicken flock a disaster flock and requiring the appellant to purchase product from Stasis Farm Ltd. using a specified payment methodology.
-
Stay decision: Mountain View Acres v British Columbia Chicken Marketing Board
Stay decision on BCCMB’s refusal to allocate quota for period A-136, following over-marketing penalties imposed for excess production in period A-135.
-
Decision: Agrifoods International Cooperative Ltd. v. British Columbia Milk Marketing Board
Appeal of the BCMMB’s decision not to renew Agrifoods’ milk hauling contract for Zones 4, 6 and 7, instead awarding it to Vedder Resources.
-
Preliminary decision: Oranya Farms II Holdings Inc. and Thomas Reid Farms v. British Columbia Chicken Marketing Board
A preliminary application from the appellants to extend the BCCMB’s July 2016 specialty quota conversion deadline
-
NPMA Practice Directive
Sets the usual time periods for completing procedural steps (45 business days) and releasing final decisions (45 business days) for regulated marketing appeals filed under the Natural Products Marketing (BC) Act.
-
Decision: Skye Hi Farms Inc. and Van Ginkel d.b.a. V3 Farms v. British Columbia Broiler Hatching Egg Commission
Appeal of BCBHEC’s quota allotment decision to grant a stay. Appellants argue procedural fairness and sound marketing policy issues. The decision was related to Amending Order 11.
-
Dismissal: Prokam Enterprises Ltd. v British Columbia Vegetable Marketing Commission
Appeal of BCVMC’s decision to deny a delivery allocation transfer to multiple transferees. The appellant was a proposed transferee but was excluded after the transferor chose to transfer its entire allocation to another party. The decision was related to BCVMC’s January 14, 2015 denial of the original transfer application.
-
Decision: Mountain Valley Dairy Ltd. v. British Columbia Milk Marketing Board
Appeal of BCMMB’s refusal to reconsider Mountain Valley’s licensing and pricing structure. Mountain Valley Dairy Ltd. argued for a new license class to support small on-farm niche processors, citing challenges in the current regulatory framework. The decision was related to the BCMMB’s Consolidated Order and the 2005 Specialty Review.