Highway Transport Board (Ont.) v. Ontario Trucking Association et al., (1988) 29 O.A.C. 177 (DC)

• Judge: Rosenberg, McKeown and Arbour, JJ.
• Case Date: October 20, 1988
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1988), 29 O.A.C. 177 (DC)

Highway Transport v. Trucking Assoc. (1988), 29 O.A.C. 177 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of The Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987, Chapter 35;

In The Matter Of The Ontario Highway Transport Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 338, Section 21;

And In The Matter Of A Notice appearing in the Ontario Gazette of February 27, 1988, being Volume 121-9 on pages 1218-1223 and pages 1230-1233 of the said volume;

And In The Matter Of The Applications of Atomic Transport Incorporated, Choice Reefer Systems Limited, Derby Transport Inc., Emerald Distributors Inc., Expeditor's Express Inc., Freeway Transportation Inc., Goliath Tractor Service Ltd., Jaryl Industries Inc., Bruce E. Jephson, Delmar Dennis Knapp, Liquidus Limited, M.S. Carriers, Inc., Orlick Transport Ltd., R & J Truck & Auto Body, Inc., R.E. Rappold Trucking Co. Inc., Serv-Way International Ltd., W.A. Silver & Son Transport Ltd., Thermo-O-Comfort Co. Ltd., Trans-Provincial Freight Carriers Limited; Ulster Transport Inc., Verspeeten Cartage Limited, 653518 Ontario Ltd., 695728 Ontario Limited; Charterways Transportation Limited;

And In The Matter Of Objections of The Ontario Trucking Association, Canadian Pacific Express & Transport Ltd./Canadian Pacifique Express & Transport Ltée, Sure-Way Transport Limited, Manitoulin Transport Inc., Taggart Service Limited, Motrux Inc., Slack Transport Limited, Lakehead Freightways Limited, William T. Rennie Transport Limited, Tallman Transports Limited, Inter-City Truck Lines (Canada) Inc., MCL Motor Carriers Limited, ACL Automobile Carriers Limited, Meyers Transport Limited, Auto Haulaway Inc., McCallum Transport Inc., Maris Transport Limited, Hutton Transport Limited, Tank Truck Transport Limited, Provost Cartage Inc., Norcros Industries Limited, McKevitt Trucking Limited, Reimer Express Lines Limited, Elliott Lake Freight Lines Limited, Maritime-Ontario Freight Lines Limited, Nickel City Transport (Sudbury) Ltd., Commercial Transport (Northern) Ltd., Bruce R. Smith Limited, Sandham Cartage Ltd., Farr's Coach Lines Limited;

Between:

Ontario Highway Transport Board (applicant) v. Ontario Trucking Association, Ontario Motor Coach Association, The Honourable Ed Fulton, Minister of Transportation (respondents)

(Nos. 635/88 and 323/88)

Indexed As: Highway Transport Board (Ont.) v. Ontario Trucking Association et al.

Ontario Divisional Court

Rosenberg, McKeown and Arbour, JJ.

October 20, 1988.

Summary:

The Federal Parliament proclaimed a new Motor Vehicle Transport Act in January 1988 (S.C. 1987, c. 35). The Act introduced a new scheme for the regulation of interprovincial transport which was fundamentally different from the scheme previously used in Ontario. A stated case was presented to the Divisional Court raising the following four questions respecting the legislation:

1. Is the Ontario Highway Transport Board the "provincial transport board" for the purposes of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987?

2. Is the Minister of Transportation for Ontario the "provincial transport board" for the purposes of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1987?

3. If the answer to question 2 is affirmative, is it lawful for the Ontario Highway Transport Board to consider evidence submitted pursuant to section 8(3) and hold a public hearing to determine if the licence sought would likely be detrimental to the public interest?

4. Are the guidelines for public interest tests valid?

The Ontario Divisional Court, per Rosenberg and McKeown, JJ., answered question one in the affirmative and the other three questions in the negative. Arbour, J., dissenting, would have answered question two in the affirmative and the other questions in the negative. In the result, the Divisional Court held, inter alia, that the Ontario Highway Transport Board was the "provincial transport board" for purposes of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987.

Carriers - Topic 1043

Federal legislation - Jurisdiction - Provincial transport board - What constitutes - The Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987 (S.C. 1987, c. 35), conferred upon a provincially constituted transport board the power to issue licences to extra-provincial carriers - The Act defined "provincial transport board" as a board, commission or other body or person having under the law of the province authority to control or regulate the operation of local bus undertakings or local truck undertakings - The Ontario Divisional Court, examined the 1987 statute and held, Arbour, J., dissenting, that the Ontario Highway Transport Board was the "provincial transport board" in Ontario for purposes of the Act and not the Minister of Transportation for Ontario - See paragraphs 1 to 73.

Carriers - Topic 1046

Federal legislation - Jurisdiction - Delegation to provincial board - Hearing procedure - A case was stated asking whether the Ontario Min. of Transportation was the "provincial transport board" for purposes of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987 (Can.), and if so, whether the Minister could delegate to the Ontario Highway Transport Board the authority to determine if a particular licence would be detrimental to the public interest - The Ontario Divisional Court, Arbour, J., dissenting, held that the Minister of Transport was not the "provincial transport board" in Ontario - The court held that the Minister could not delegate authority to the board to conduct hearings to determine what would be detrimental to the public interest vis-à-vis extraprovincial transport - See paragraphs 1 to 23, 74, 75.

Carriers - Topic 1503

Licensing - Ministerial guidelines - The Ontario Minister of Transportation issued guidelines setting out the test to be applied by the Ontario Highway Transportation Board in licensing extra-provincial carriers - The Ontario Divisional Court held that the guidelines were invalid because they purported to be mandatory and they suggested a more stringent test for licensing than that imposed by the relevant legislation (Motor Vehicle Transport Act, S.C. 1987, c. 35) - See paragraphs 24 to 26, 27, 76.

Constitutional Law - Topic 606.1

Powers of Parliament and the legislatures - Federal delegation of power to provincial cabinet minister - The Ontario Divisional Court discussed whether Parliament could delegate federal powers to a provincial cabinet minister and in particular whether Parliament could delegate the power to regulate interprovincial transportation to the provincial Min. of Transportation.

Constitutional Law - Topic 6642

Federal jurisdiction - Constitution Act, 1867 - Interprovincial works and undertakings - Transportation - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 606.1 above].

Words and Phrases

Provincial transport board - The Ontario Divisional Court discussed whether the Ontario Highway Transport Board or the Ontario Min. of Transportation was the "provincial transport board" for purposes of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, S.C. 1987, c. 35.

Cases Noticed:

T.E. Quinn Truck Lines Limited v. Minister of Transportation and Communications for the Province of Ontario, [1981] 2 S.C.R. 657; 39 N.R. 617; 129 D.L.R.(3d) 513 (S.C.C.), consd. [paras. 7, 57].

R. v. Northern Quebec Transport Ltd., [1955] 1 O.R. 473 (H.C.J.), consd. [paras. 16, 17].

Re Reimer Express Lines Ltd., [1957] O.W.N. 332; 9 D.L.R.(2d) 42; 75 C.R.T.C. 330, consd. [paras. 16, 58, 60].

Coughlin v. Ontario Highway Transport Board et al. (1968), 68 D.L.R.(2d) 384 (S.C.C.), consd. [paras. 18, 71].

National Freight Consultants Inc. et al. v. Motor Transport Board et al. (1980), 32 N.R. 26; 112 D.L.R.(3d) 32 (S.C.C.), consd. [paras. 20, 58, 59, 65].

Branigan v. Yukon Medical Council et al. (1986), 21 Admin. L.R. 149, refd to. [para. 22].

Peralta et al. v. Ontario (1985), 7 O.A.C. 283; 49 O.R.(2d) 705 (C.A.), consd. [paras. 22, 23, 70, 71].

Ahmad v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia and Council of the College et al., [1971] 2 W.W.R. 60 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Barnard v. National Dock Labour Board, [1953] All E.R. 1113, refd to. [para. 22].

Re Shoal Lake Band of Indians No. 39 et al. and Ontario (1979), 101 D.L.R.(3d) 132, consd. [para. 29].

Attorney General for Nova Scotia v. the Attorney General of Canada, [1951] S.C.R. 31, consd. [paras. 3237, 72].

P.E.I. Potato Marketing Board v. H.B. Willis Inc. and the Attorney General of Canada, [1952] 4 D.L.R. 146, consd. [para. 37].

Re Parent Cartage Limited and Ontario Highway Transport Board (1979), 26 O.R.(2d) 83, consd. [paras. 54, 55, 60].

A.G. Ontario v. Winner, [1954] A.C. 541, refd to. [para. 62].

Statutes Noticed:

Motor Vehicle Transport Act, S.C. 1953-54, c. 59, generally [para. 2 et seq.]; s. 3(2) [para. 5].

Motor Vehicle Transport Act, S.C. 1987, c. 35, generally, sect. 2(1), sect. 7, sect. 8 [para. 2 et seq.].

Public Commercial Vehicles Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 407, generally [para. 2 et seq.]; sect. 6(1) [paras. 6, 7, 49]; sect. 7(1) [paras. 6, 49]; sect. 9(3), sect. 9(4) [para. 63].

Public Vehicles Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 425, generally [para. 2 et seq.]; sect. 6 [para. 50].

Ontario Highway Transport Board Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 338, generally [para. 1 et seq.]

Authors and Works Noticed:

Canada Gazette, Part II, vol. 122, No. 1, pp. 302, 304 [para. 72].

Driedger, E.A., The Interaction of Federal and Provincial Laws (1976), 54 Can. Bar Rev. 695, pp. 700 [para. 69]; 703 [para. 28].

Hogg, Peter, Constitutional Law of Canada (2nd Ed.), p. 301 [para. 62].

Lederman, W.R., Some Forms and Limitations of Cooperative Federalism (1967), 45 Can. Bar Rev. 409, pp. 418, 419 [para. 68]; 424, 425 [para. 39]; 427 [para. 40]; 428 [para. 41].

Counsel:

Thomas Lederer and S. Fischer, for the Ontario Highway Transport Board;

D.J.M. Brown, Q.C., and Paul B. Sommerville, for the Ontario Trucking Association;

Janet Minor, for the Minister of Transport, the Hon. Ed Fulton;

Robert Warren, for the Ontario Motor Coach Association.

This stated case was heard on July 12, 13 and 14, 1988, before Rosenberg, McKeown and Arbour, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court. The decision of the Divisional Court was released on October 20, 1988, including the following opinions:

Rosenberg, J. - See paragraphs 1 to 28;

McKeown, J. - See paragraphs 27 to 43;

Arbour, J., dissenting - See paragraphs 44 to 77.