AGT Ltd. v. Canada ( Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission )
A-1376-92
Décary J.A.
21/12/94
12 pp.
Appeal from Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) decision finding certain affiliated companies "integral" to basic telephone service and thus treating income therefrom as appellant's income for rate-making purposes -- Privatization of Albertan Crown agent, resulting in regulated corporation and several affiliated companies -- Directory related assets and activities, historically owned and carried on by Crown agent, transferred to unregulated affiliated companies -- CRTC issuing order for disclosure of affiliated companies' financial information for consideration in fixing appellant's telephone rates pursuant to Railway Act, s. 340(1)-Power to treat income of non-regulated companies affiliated to regular telephone company as income of latter company for purposes of setting its tariff (integrality power) not expressly provided for in CRTC's enabling statute -- Appellant submitting CRTC's integrality power existing by necessary implication only in circumstances where regulated company arranging operations in way as to avoid including significant profits in its revenue -- Bell Canada v. Canada (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1722 holding that fixing of just and reasonable tolls and tariffs necessarily involves regulation of revenues of regulated entity -- CRTC unable to discharge s. 340(1) obligation without authority to consider and determine (1) what assets constitute utility's rate base; (2) utility investors' entitlement to return; (3) utility's operating expenses and existing sources of revenue -- Practical necessity requiring CRTC to possess power to cross corporate boundaries and deem net income of affiliated companies, relating to services and operations integral to telephone business of regulated company, as revenue of latter company for regulatory purposes-Integrality power necessarily implied from nature and purpose of CRTC's regulatory authority -- Fact Parliament has granted express power in one case implying it has not granted it in another case in absence of express grant (implied exclusion principle) must be applied with caution and should be ignored in circumstances where subsequent amendment to earlier enabling statute -- Within CRTC's jurisdiction to make order -- Appeal dismissed -- Railway Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. R-3, s. 340(1).