Jake Hoeppner says he always thought his class action suit against the Canadian Wheat Board would end up in the Supreme Court of Canada.
In the next couple of weeks he will be deciding with his lawyer whether to ask the court for leave to appeal a recent ruling by the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench.
Appeal judges ruled last week farmers cannot sue the wheat board. They were not ruling on the details of Hoeppner’s suit, but rather on whether he had the right to sue.
Read Also
Forecast leans toward cooling trend
July saw below average temperatures, August came in with near to slightly above average temperatures and September built on this warming trend with well above average temperatures for the month.
“The court determined that the wheat board is answerable to the minister (of agriculture), and through him to Parliament,” said wheat board spokesperson Tracey Bryksa.
“We would say it’s a legal decision, determined by the courts,” she said.
Patrick Riley, Hoeppner’s lawyer, said appeal judges ruled farmers must look for answers to concerns first at the wheat board, then with the minister of agriculture, then with Parliament.
Hoeppner said he’s done that, but his concerns have not been addressed.
“It’s a complete circle I’ve gone now, and what I started off with at the start seems to be the right thing that the judge now suggests happen.”
Decision overturned
Riley compared Hoeppner’s case to one earlier in his career when he sued the government on behalf of a welfare recipient. Lower courts ruled his client could not sue, but the Supreme Court overturned the decision.
“My client’s concern is … it does seem to make wheat farmers second-class citizens in the sense that just about every other citizen can sue the government if the government causes harm to them,” said Riley.
The class action suit was launched in December 1995 by M-Jay Farm Enterprises Ltd., owned by Hoeppner, who is the Reform MP for Portage-Lisgar, and his wife Fran.
The statement of claim for the suit contended the wheat board should have charged higher buy-back fees to large exporters of feed wheat in 1993-94.
Hoeppner said the exporters made money by selling fusarium-infected wheat into the higher-priced U.S. human consumption market. He said some of that money should have been returned to farmers through price pooling.
