Grape Growers did the right thing, tribunal rules

Thursday, March 1, 2012

by SUSAN MANN

Grape Growers of Ontario did the appropriate thing in appointing an inspector to resolve a dispute between a Grimsby-area winery and a grower, an agricultural tribunal has decided.

In a Feb. 28 ruling, the Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal by Andrew Peller Limited requesting the Grape Growers’ decision to appoint the third-party inspector be overturned.

The dispute was between the winery and grower Don Troup, who had a long-term supply agreement with the company. Troup supplied six bins of merlot grapes to Andrew Peller on Sept. 26, 2010. The winery tested the grapes and rejected them because the level of volatile acids exceeded the maximum of .020 grams per 100 millilitres. The winery says the level of acids in Troup’s grapes were .021 grams per 100 millilitres, it says in the tribunal’s written decision.

But Troup subsequently had the grapes tested at Brock University and came up with a different figure for the level of acids - .019 grams per 100 millilitres. He says the grapes were improperly rejected and asked Grape Growers to appoint a third-party inspector to resolve the dispute.

The organization was prepared to appoint the inspector and the results would be final and binding on both the grower and winery. But the winery objected to the appointment “on the basis that the grapes had been dumped and that there was nothing left to inspect,” the decision says.

A hearing, requested by the winery, was held Sept. 20, 2011, but Grape Growers declined to reverse its decision to appoint the inspector.

In cases of disputes between growers and grape buyers over the quality, condition or fitness of grapes for processing, Grape Growers’ regulations say the organization can refer the matter to a third-party inspector. There’s nothing in the regulations that says that has to be done within a particular timeframe.

While there’s some appeal to the winery’s argument that there can’t be an inspection if there’s nothing left to inspect, “the Tribunal finds that this interpretation of the regulations places too much emphasis on the word inspector,” the decision states.

The inspector’s actual role assigned to it as part of the regulations is “not to inspect but to make a decision, which shall be final and binding on the producer and buyer,” the decision says.

Even though an inspection may no longer be possible in this case, the Tribunal says the inspector is still able to carry out his or her assigned role and decide the dispute between the two parties.

Neither John Peller, chief executive officer of Andrew Peller Limited, nor Debbie Zimmerman, CEO of Grape Growers of Ontario, could be reached for comment. BF