Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, Local 707 v. Suncor Energy Inc., (2012) 536 A.R. 325

• Judge: Watson, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: October 17, 2012
• Citations: (2012), 536 A.R. 325;2012 ABCA 307

CEPU v. Suncor Energy Inc. (2012), 536 A.R. 325; 559 W.A.C. 325 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] A.R. TBEd. OC.085

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, Local 707 (respondent/respondent/applicant) v. Suncor Energy Inc. (applicant/appellant/respondent)

(1203-0234-AC; 2012 ABCA 307)

Indexed As: Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, Local 707 v. Suncor Energy Inc.

Alberta Court of Appeal

Watson, J.A.

October 22, 2012.

Summary:

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench (Macklin, J.), in a decision reported at 548 A.R. 195, granted an injunction which stopped Suncor Energy Inc. from its planned implementation of a random drug and alcohol testing policy for union workers at Suncor's large oil sands work site near Fort McMurray. The injunction, which was granted on an application brought by the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, Local 707, was to run until a grievance of Suncor's policy was heard by an arbitrator under the procedure in the collective agreement between Suncor and the union. Following his grant of the injunction, Macklin, J., heard and denied a motion by Suncor for a stay of the injunction. Suncor now applied for a stay pending appeal of the injunction.

The Alberta Court of Appeal, per Watson, J.A., dismissed the application for a stay.

Injunctions - Topic 1724

Interlocutory or interim injunctions - Stay of interim or interlocutory injunction - Pending appeal - [See Injunctions - Topic 4545 ].

Injunctions - Topic 4545

Operation of injunctions - Suspension - Stay pending appeal - When available - Macklin, J., granted an injunction which stopped Suncor Energy Inc. from its planned implementation of a random drug and alcohol testing policy for union workers at Suncor's large oil sands work site near Fort McMurray - The injunction, which was granted on an application brought by the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, Local 707, was to run until a grievance of Suncor's policy was heard by an arbitrator under the procedure in the collective agreement between Suncor and the union - Following his grant of the injunction, Macklin, J., heard and denied a motion by Suncor for a stay of the injunction - Suncor now applied for a stay pending appeal of the injunction - The Alberta Court of Appeal, per Watson, J.A., dismissed the application - Suncor had a serious question which was arguable on the appeal - However, Watson, J.A., was persuaded that commencing the new policy would not create such an appreciable increase in the margin of worker safety as to demand that the Suncor policy go forward in the time between now and the time a panel of the court would be dealing with the case - The union's position as to harm, however, was clear - On balance, for this comparatively short period, the negative effect on union members was visible, and the prospect of an actual increase in the margin of safety during such a short window of time was not enough to overcome that fact.

Practice - Topic 8954

Appeals - Stay of proceedings pending appeal - What constitutes "irreparable harm" - [See Injunctions - Topic 4545 ].

Practice - Topic 8958

Appeals - Stay of proceedings pending appeal - Balance of convenience and justice - [See Injunctions - Topic 4545 ].

Cases Noticed:

Dornan et al. v. Dornan Estate et al. (2002), 299 A.R. 358; 266 W.A.C. 358; 98 Alta. L.R.(3d) 29; 2002 ABCA 64, refd to. [para. 2].

Slater v. Burgoin (2001), 286 A.R. 373; 253 W.A.C. 373; 2001 ABCA 213, refd to. [para. 2].

Phillips et al. v. Phillips et al. (2005), 380 A.R. 167; 363 W.A.C. 167; 56 Alta. L.R.(4th) 26; 2005 ABCA 405, refd to. [para. 2].

Phillips v. Avena - see Phillips et al. v. Phillips et al.

J.B. v. A.G. (2008), 429 A.R. 394; 421 W.A.C. 394; 2008 ABCA 61, refd to. [para. 3].

C.B. v. P.C. et al. (2003), 346 A.R. 121; 320 W.A.C. 121; 2003 ABCA 321, refd to. [para. 3].

Byatt et al. v. Alberta et al. (1997), 196 A.R. 51; 141 W.A.C. 51; 144 D.L.R.(4th) 436 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 3].

Alberta (Treasury Branches) et al. v. Pocklington Financial Corp. et al. (1998), 228 A.R. 115; 188 W.A.C. 115; 1998 ABCA 254, refd to. [para. 3].

Blacklaws et al. v. 470433 Alberta Ltd. (1998), 216 A.R. 393; 175 W.A.C. 393; 1998 ABCA 119, refd to. [para. 4].

Blacklaws v. Morrow - see Blacklaws et al. v. 470433 Alberta Ltd.

Fulton Insurance Agencies Ltd. v. Purdy (1990), 100 N.S.R.(2d) 341; 272 A.P.R. 341 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. Innocente (D.J.) et al. (2001), 194 N.S.R.(2d) 183; 606 A.P.R. 183; 2001 NSCA 97, refd to. [para. 4].

D.L.W. v. Nova Scotia Barristers' Society, [2010] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 107; 2010 NSCA 40, refd to. [para. 4].

Armoyan v. Armoyan, [2011] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 221; 2011 NSCA 92, refd to. [para. 4].

Allard v. Shaw Communications Inc. et al. (2010), 493 A.R. 182; 502 W.A.C. 182; 2010 ABCA 316, leave to appeal refused (2011), 422 N.R. 391 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Cole (R.) (2012), 436 N.R. 102; 297 O.A.C. 1; 2012 SCC 53, refd to. [para. 7].

Fuller Western Rubber Linings Ltd. et al. v. Spence Corrosion Services Ltd. et al. (2012), 524 A.R. 246; 545 W.A.C. 246; 2012 ABCA 137, refd to. [para. 9].

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311; 164 N.R. 1; 60 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 10].

Harper v. Canada (Attorney General), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 764; 262 N.R. 201; 271 A.R. 201; 234 W.A.C. 201; 2000 SCC 57, refd to. [para. 10].

Irving Pulp and Paper Ltd. v. Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada, Local 30 (2011), 375 N.B.R.(2d) 92; 969 A.P.R. 92; 2011 NBCA 58, leave to appeal granted (2012), 445 N.R. 389 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 18].

Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees v. Canadian Pacific Ltd., [1996] 2 S.C.R. 495; 198 N.R. 161; 78 B.C.A.C. 162; 128 W.A.C. 162; 136 D.L.R.(4th) 289, refd to. [para. 23].

Autoweld Systems Ltd. v. CRC-Evans Pipeline International Inc. et al., [2009] A.R. Uned. 314; 2009 ABCA 366, leave to appeal refused (2010), 406 N.R. 393, refd to. [para. 24].

Workers' Compensation Board (B.C.) v. Human Rights Tribunal (B.C.) et al., [2011] 3 S.C.R. 422; 421 N.R. 338; 311 B.C.A.C. 1; 529 W.A.C. 1; 2011 SCC 52, refd to. [para. 24].

Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, Local 707 v. Suncor Energy Inc. (alcohol and Drug Policy Grievance), [2008] A.G.A.A. No. 55; 178 L.A.C.(4th) 223, refd to. [para. 26].

Bar C Ranch and Cattle Co. v. Red Rock Sawmills Ltd. et al., [2004] A.R. Uned. 48; 2004 ABCA 113, refd to. [para. 29].

Hadmoor Productions Ltd. v. Hamilton, [1982] 1 All E.R. 1042, refd to. [para. 29].

Stonewater Group of Restaurants Inc. et al. v. Mikes Restaurants Inc., [2006] A.R. Uned. 98; 50 C.P.R.(4th) 161; 2006 ABCA 193, refd to. [para 29].

United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the U.S. and Canada, Local 448 - see U.A. Local 488 v. Bantrel Constructors Co.

U.A., Local 488 v. Bantrel Constructors Co. (2007), 162 L.A.C.(4th) 122 (Alta. Arb. Bd.), refd to. [para. 36].

Walker v. Imperial Oil Ltd. (1998), 230 A.R. 325; 1998 ABQB 785, refd to. [para. 36].

Exxon Corp. v. ESSO Workers' Union Inc. (1997), 118 F3d 841 (Fed. Cir. Ct.), refd to. [para. 36].

United Nurses of Alberta et al. v. St. Michael's Health Centre et al. (2002), 317 A.R. 319; 284 W.A.C. 319; 2003 ABCA 5, refd to. [para. 37].

British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Malik et al., [2011] 1 S.C.R. 657; 414 N.R. 332; 303 B.C.A.C. 1; 512 W.A.C. 1; 2011 SCC 18, refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. Proulx (J.K.D.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61; 249 N.R. 201; 142 Man.R.(2d) 161; 212 W.A.C. 161; 2000 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 38].

R. v. Dyment, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 417; 89 N.R. 249; 73 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 13; 229 A.P.R. 13; 55 D.L.R.(4th) 503, refd to. [para. 39].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Spry, Ian C.F., The Principles of Equitable Remedies: Specific Performance, Injunctions, Rectification, and Equitable Damages (5th Ed. 1997), pp. 469-470 [para. 38].

Counsel:

D.T. Williams and R. Khullar, for the respondent;

T.W. Wakeling, Q.C., and B.B. Johnston, for the applicant.

This application was heard on October 17, 2012, before Watson, J.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal, who filed the following reasons for decision on October 22, 2012.