Supreme Court Judgments

Decision Information

Decision Content

 

Canadian Broadcasting League v. CRTC, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 174

 

The Canadian Broadcasting League      Appellant;

 

and

 

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission and Canadian Cablesystems (Ontario) Limited       Respondents;

 

and between

 

The Canadian Broadcasting League     Appellant;

 

and

 

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission and Kingston Cable T.V. Limited               Respondents.                                                                    

 

File Nos.:  17366 and 17367.

 

1985: March 27.

 

Present: Dickson C.J. and  Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Chouinard, Lamer and Wilson JJ.

 

 

on appeal from the federal court of appeal

 


Broadcasting ‑‑ Decision of CRTC allowing amendment to cable television broadcasting licence by increasing installation fee and maximum monthly fee to members  ‑‑ Whether CRTC authorized by statute or regulation to approve such an amendment  ‑‑ Authority to fix fees existing by necessary implication to further policy objectives of s. 3 of the Broadcasting Act.

 

APPEALS from a judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, [1983] 1 F.C. 182, dismissing an appeal from a decision of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (1980), 5 C.R.T. 786. Appeals dismissed.

 

Andrew J. Roman, for the appellant.

 

Avrum Cohen, for the respondent Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission.

 

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

 

1.                The Chief Justice -- We have not been persuaded that there was any error in law on the part of the Federal Court of Appeal in these two appeals.  The appeals are accordingly dismissed.  There will be no order as to costs.

 

Judgment accordingly.

 

Solicitor for the appellant: Andrew J. Roman, Ottawa.

 


Solicitor for the respondent the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission: the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, Hull.

 

 

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.