Updated to February 13, 2009

A pre-hearing conference is scheduled for April 23, 2009.

Updated to March 13, 2009

The hearing in this matter is scheduled for October 1-2, 2009.

Updated to May 21, 2009

During the month of June 2009, several applications for party status were filed with the Tribunal.  At a further pre-hearing conference on July 28, 2009, several of the applicants for party status withdrew their applications.  The Tribunal granted full party status to The 111 Pension Rights Association, an unincorporated association represented by three members in a representative capacity, who are on the Association’s steering committee.  Limited party status was granted to Janeen Bowes, Catherine Schell, Jean Townsend and Linda Zwicker.

Updated to August 14, 2009

On August 26, 2009, the 111 Pension Rights Association filed a motion to vary the matters in issue that were approved by the Tribunal at a pre-hearing conference on April 23, 2009.  The issues approved by the Tribunal related to the applicability of s.69(1)(e) of the PBA as authority for the order of a partial wind up of the Plan by the Superintendent, and if applicable, the extent of such wind up. The motion sought to vary those issues to include the applicability of s.69(1)(d) of the PBA  as an alternative ground to authorize the partial wind up and the extent of such wind up.  At the motion hearing on September 3, 2009, Imperial Oil submitted that the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to extend the hearing to a consideration of  s.69(1)(d) of the PBA  as an alternative ground for the proposed wind up, on the grounds that the subsection was not referred to in the Superintendent’s Notice of Proposal. In its Decision on Motion dated September 23, 2009, the Tribunal concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to make the order as requested and it dismissed the motion.  On September 29, 2009, the October hearing dates were briefly adjourned to December 14 – 18, 2009.

Updated to October 20, 2009

On November 13, 2009, the 111 Pension Rights Association (the “Association”) filed a request to adjourn the December hearing dates.  The basis for the request was that, subsequent to the Tribunal’s issuance of its Decision, dated September 23, 2009 on  an adjournment  motion, the Superintendent reactivated his investigation of the Plan in order to consider the applicability of s.69(1)(d) of the PBA, and invited the parties to file submissions as to whether a Notice of Proposal (“NOP”) should be issued proposing to order a partial wind up under that subsection, in relation to the transfer of Imperial Oil’s head office and other functions from 111 St. Clair Avenue West in Toronto to Calgary. On November 24, 2009, the Tribunal heard the parties’ submissions and adjourned the hearing dates, to allow time for the Superintendent to decide whether to propose to order a partial wind up pursuant to s.69(1)(d), and for parties to request and proceed towards a hearing before the Tribunal with respect to such decision.  The Superintendent’s decision is expected by the end of this year or early in 2010.  The Tribunal adjourned the matter to March 23, 2010 at which time the parties will provide an update as to the status of the s.69(1)(d) application.

Updated to November 30, 2009