Dave Bryan lost another battle last week, but says the war is still not over.
The Manitoba Court of Appeal struck down the Saskatchewan farmer’s constitutional challenge against the Canadian Wheat Board’s monopoly over prairie wheat and export barley sales.
The decision was unanimous among the three judges hearing the case. Bryan, who farms at Central Butte, was surprised at the unanimous decision, but vowed to press on with his CWB challenge. He now plans to apply for leave to have his case heard by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Read Also
Russian wheat exports start to pick up the pace
Russia has had a slow start for its 2025-26 wheat export program, but the pace is starting to pick up and that is a bearish factor for prices.
“It’d be tough for them not to hear it,” said Bryan in a Feb. 8 interview. “It’s a pretty fundamental constitutional issue.”
One of the main issues brought before the Manitoba Court of Appeal was the question of provincial and federal jurisdiction under the Canadian constitution. Bryan’s lawyer, Art Stacey, argued that the federal government oversteps its power to regulate trade through the Canadian Wheat Board Act. Stacey told the appeal judges that the export monopoly prohibits trade rather than regulating it.
Stacey also said the CWB Act deprives farmers of their rights to their property, which in this case is grain. Stacey maintained that property rights are a provincial jurisdiction.
A year ago, the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench tossed out a constitutional challenge against the CWB and fined Bryan $9,000 for illegally selling his grain into the United States. Bryan had hauled about 4,000 bushels of wheat across the border without an export licence.
Last week’s decision did not surprise the Canadian Wheat Board. The board viewed the outcome as a reaffirmation of the job it is doing for prairie grain growers, said spokesperson Deanna Allen.
“It means that what we are doing is proper and in keeping with Canada’s laws and regulations.
“We feel the (CWB) Act is fair and just as it currently exists, and we operate under that premise.”
Followed precedent
In a 15-page decision the judges pointed to previous precedents that support the wheat board’s export monopoly as a tool for regulating trade and commerce.
“The court basically followed precedence, as it does from time to time, and said this issue has already been decided,” said crown attorney Chris Mainella. “The court followed the past decisions.”
Despite last week’s court decision, Bryan believes the issue is one that all grain growers should be concerned with.
“If you grow the grain, you ought to have ownership of it,” he said. “And if you have ownership of it, you should be able to decide who you sell it to.”
