producing VQAO quality wine. The By-Law allows a winery to
remain a member for 18 months in the absence of new wine
approvals and allows a winery to continue to use the regulated
terms to sell an approved wine for up to one year after its membership is terminated.
The Doctrine of Paramountcy
 The Applicant asked this court to grant certain relief based
on the doctrine of paramountcy — a doctrine that recognizes that
where federal and provincial laws come into conflict, the federal
 Conflicts triggering the federal paramountcy doctrine will
arise in one of two situations:
(a) there is an operational conflict that arises because it is
impossible to comply with both laws; or
(b) although it is possible to comply with both laws, the opera-
tion of the provincial law frustrates the purpose of the
federal enactment (Alberta (Attorney General) v. Moloney,
 3 S.C.R. 327,  S.C.J. No. 51, 2015 SCC 51,
at para. 18).
 There are several principles that a court must keep in
mind when considering an argument based on the doctrine of
( i) the burden of proof to establish a conflict between federal
and provincial legislation rests on the party alleging such
a conflict. Discharging that burden is not an easy task (ibid.,
at para. 27);
( ii) the approach of the courts is to embrace cooperative federalism and recognize concurrent federal and provincial jurisdiction in their respective domains. Paramountcy is to be
applied with restraint, under the presumption that Parliament intends its laws to co-exist with provincial law (ibid.);
( iii) the federal Parliament legislating in respect of a matter does
not lead to a presumption that it intended to rule out provincial legislation in respect of the same subject (Canadian
Western Bank v. Alberta,  2 S.C.R. 3,  S.C.J. No.
22, 2007 SCC 22, at para. 74).
 Unless there is a genuine inconsistency, the court will
favour an interpretation of the federal legislation that allows the
concurrent operation of both laws (Moloney, at para. 27). Where