CRTC v. CTV Television Network Ltd. et al.

CRTC v. CTV Television Network Ltd. et al.

The Executive Committee lawfully had authority under s.17(1) to impose the drama‑presentation condition because the subject was not within the limited regulation-making heads of s.16(1)(b)(i) and, absent exercise of s.16(1)(b)(ix), s.17 was not ousted; CRTC gave sufficient notice that Canadian drama offerings would be discussed so there was no breach of natural justice in failing to disclose the precise condition in advance; absences of some hearing panel members did not invalidate the Executive Committee decision where the statute contemplates consultation with part-time members, transcripts were available and a quorum of full-time members participated.

Citation
[1982] 1 SCR 530
Parties
Appellant and Cross Respondent: Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission; Respondent and Cross Appellant: CTV Television Network Limited; Respondent (intervenor): National Action Committee on the Status of Women; Respondent (intervenor): Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists; Respondent (intervenor): Kevin Hopper; Respondent (intervenor): The 1812 Committee; Respondent (intervenor): Joint Broadcast Committee; Respondent (intervenor): Association of Canadian Advertisers Inc./Institute of Canadian Advertising; Respondent (intervenor): Canadian Film & Television Association; Respondent (intervenor): Council of Canadian Filmmakers; Respondent (intervenor): Interchurch Communications; Respondent (intervenor): Anglican Church of Canada; Respondent (intervenor): Association of Television Producers and Directors (Toronto)
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 April 1982
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Judicial Review/appeal of CRTC Licence Renewal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Federal Court of Appeal Decision Setting Aside CRTC Licence Renewal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Federal Court of Appeal order set aside; CRTC decision renewing CTV licence with the challenged condition restored; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
CRTC Jurisdiction, Licence Conditions, Natural Justice and Notice, Regulation Making Power Vs Licence Conditions, Program Content Control, Hearing Panel Composition and Quorum
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Broadcasting Law Administrative Tribunal Procedure CRTC Jurisdiction Licence Conditions Natural Justice and Notice Regulation Making Power Vs Licence Conditions Program Content Control +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission

Appellant and Cross Respondent

CTV Television Network Limited

Respondent and Cross Appellant

National Action Committee on the Status of Women

Respondent (intervenor)

Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists

Respondent (intervenor)

Kevin Hopper

Respondent (intervenor)

The 1812 Committee

Respondent (intervenor)

Joint Broadcast Committee

Respondent (intervenor)

Association of Canadian Advertisers Inc./Institute of Canadian Advertising

Respondent (intervenor)

Canadian Film & Television Association

Respondent (intervenor)

Council of Canadian Filmmakers

Respondent (intervenor)

Interchurch Communications

Respondent (intervenor)

Anglican Church of Canada

Respondent (intervenor)

Association of Television Producers and Directors (Toronto)

Respondent (intervenor)

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Judicial Review/appeal of CRTC Licence Renewal / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Federal Court of Appeal Decision Setting Aside CRTC Licence Renewal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Executive Committee of CRTC had jurisdiction under s.17 to impose a condition requiring specific hours of original new Canadian drama
  2. 2 Whether the regulation-making power under s.16 ousted the power of the Executive Committee under s.17 to impose content-related licence conditions
  3. 3 Whether CTV was denied natural justice by lack of prior notice of the particular condition imposed

Ratio Decidendi

The Executive Committee lawfully had authority under s.17(1) to impose the drama‑presentation condition because the subject was not within the limited regulation-making heads of s.16(1)(b)(i) and, absent exercise of s.16(1)(b)(ix), s.17 was not ousted; CRTC gave sufficient notice that Canadian drama offerings would be discussed so there was no breach of natural justice in failing to disclose the precise condition in advance; absences of some hearing panel members did not invalidate the Executive Committee decision where the statute contemplates consultation with part-time members, transcripts were available and a quorum of full-time members participated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Federal Court of Appeal order set aside; CRTC decision renewing CTV licence with the challenged condition restored; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Federal Court of Appeal judgment setting aside CRTC decision dated August 3, 1979 is set aside
  • Decision of the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission renewing CTV’s network broadcasting licence subject to the condition (26 hours original new Canadian drama in 1980-81 and 39 hours in 1981-82) is restored