Browse decisions and determinations
This database contains all public Decisions, Determinations, Orders and certain interim Decisions made by the Canadian Transportation Agency since 1988. Some decisions are confidential and are not published.
Ruling type
Date
Showing 1-10 of 13 decisions.
This is in reference to the above-noted complaint filed by Ferroequus Railway Company Limited (FE) on October 30, 2001. In its application, FE is applying to the Canadian Transportation Agency (the Agency) pursuant to subsections 138(1) and (2) of theCanada Transportation Act (CTA), for an order...
LET-R-443-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-11-09
By Decision No. LET-AT-R-278-2001 dated June 13, 2001, the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) required VIA Rail Canada Inc. (VIA) to respond to the Agency's Decision No. LET-AT-R-261-2001 dated May 31, 2001, as well as the issues raised in the Council of Canadians with Disabilities' (CCD)...
LET-AT-R-304-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-06-29
Reference is made to Trillium Railway Company Limited's solicitors (Trillium) correspondences dated December 27, 2000 and March 5, 2001 and to the City of Welland (the City) response dated March 20, 2001 with respect to the enforcement of Canadian Transportation Agency Order No. 2000-AGR-42.
On...
LET-R-214-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-04-30
By letter dated December 4, 2000, the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) filed an application with the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) for interim relief pursuant to subsections 27(1) and 28(2) of the Canada Transportation Act (CTA), and for a final order pursuant to section 172...
LET-AT-R-176-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-04-03
In order to conduct its inquiry into whether the tariff constitutes an obstacle and, if so, whether the obstacle is undue, the Agency requires information and evidence. In particular, the Agency requires a complete and detailed response from VIA to the issues identified in the Agency Decision No....
LET-AT-R-147-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-03-21
The Canadian Transportation Agency (the Agency) has received your letter of February 22, 2001 and has carefully considered the submissions made therein. VIA Rail Canada Inc. (VIA) has argued the position that the Agency does not have the jurisdiction to proceed with the new inquiry with respect to...
LET-AT-R-146-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-03-21
This is in reference to the above-noted application filed by the Hudson Bay Railway Company (HBRC) on February 27, 2001. In its application, HBRC requests two Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) orders. First, HBRC asks the Agency for what may be termed a "running rights" order. That is, HBRC...
LET-R-128-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-03-16
This is in reference to the above-noted application filed by the Ferroequus Railway Company Limited (FE) on February 20, 2001. In its application, FE requests three Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) orders. Firstly, FE asks the Agency for what may be termed a "running rights" order. That is,...
LET-R-127-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-03-16
On December 7, 2000 the Federal Court of Appeal ruled that the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) did not, under existing legislation, have the jurisdiction to investigate and determine complaints relating to noise, smoke and vibrations emanating from the day-to-day operations of a federal...
LET-R-123-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-03-15
The Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD), by letters dated February 1 and 7, 2001 requests that the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) consider a number of issues which are set out below. CCD's request that the Agency proceed with the issuance of an interim order is addressed in a...
LET-AT-R-82-2001 | Letter Decision | 2001-02-22