R. v. Longard (R.D.) Services Ltd., 2015 NSPC 20

• Judge: Derrick, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: April 17, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2015 NSPC 20;(2015), 358 N.S.R.(2d) 202 (PC)

R. v. Longard Services Ltd. (2015), 358 N.S.R.(2d) 202 (PC);

    1131 A.P.R. 202

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. AP.050

Her Majesty the Queen v. R.D. Longard Services Limited

(2690136; 2690137; 2015 NSPC 20)

Indexed As: R. v. Longard (R.D.) Services Ltd.

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Derrick, P.C.J.

April 17, 2015.

Summary:

An electrician employed by Longard (R.D.) Services Ltd. was electrocuted and died while working at a job site. Longard was charged under s. 74(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act with (1) failing to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances to provide such information, instruction or supervision as necessary to the health and safety of an employee at the workplace; and (2) failing to ensure that an electrical installation was serviced, repaired or dismantled in accordance with the Canadian Electrical Code.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found Longard guilty of both offences.

Editor's Note: For preliminary decisions involving this matter, see (2014), 353 N.S.R.(2d) 329; 1115 A.P.R. 329, [2015] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 46, and (2015), 355 N.S.R.(2d) 197; 1123 A.P.R. 197.

Trade Regulation - Topic 7874

Industrial safety - Offences - Defences - Due diligence - [See second Trade Regulation - Topic 7884 and Trade Regulation - Topic 7899 ].

Trade Regulation - Topic 7884

Industrial safety - Particular offences - Failure to take every reasonable precaution - An electrician (Boyle) employed by Longard (R.D.) Services Ltd. was electrocuted and died while working at a job site - Longard was charged under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) with, inter alia, failing to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances to provide such information, instruction or supervision as necessary to the health and safety of an employee at the workplace - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court stated that "liability can be fixed against an employer for committing an offence under the OHSA where no causal connection has been established between the contravening of the legislation and the death. ... Just because the evidence does not establish that what an employer failed to do was the cause of the employee's injuries or death does not mean the employer has been compliant with its occupational health and safety obligations. My task does not involve a determination of whether Longard's workplace safety practices were so deficient that Chris Boyle died as a result. What I must decide is whether the Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Longard took every reasonable precaution to ensure its employees worked safely, that it did what a 'reasonably prudent' employer would have done." - See paragraphs 45 and 46.

Trade Regulation - Topic 7884

Industrial safety - Particular offences - Failure to take every reasonable precaution - An electrician (Boyle) employed by Longard (R.D.) Services Ltd. was electrocuted and died while working at a job site - Longard was charged with failing to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances to provide such information, instruction or supervision as necessary to the health and safety of an employee at the workplace (Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA), s. 13(1)(c)) - Longard argued that it was not reasonably foreseeable that an experienced, competent and safety-conscious electrician such as Boyle would work on a live electrical system - It noted that Boyle had been designated the safety officer for the company and was in the process of preparing a safety manual - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found Longard guilty - The fact that Boyle made a tragic miscalculation did not absolve Longard of responsibility for its obligations under the OHSA - Longard took a completely hands-off approach to Boyle's work, relying exclusively on his experience and commitment to safety - It had no safety program, no manual and no policies - The defence of due diligence was not made out - See paragraphs 39 to 52.

Trade Regulation - Topic 7899

Industrial safety - Particular offences - Failure to comply with Regulations under health and safety legislation - An electrician (Boyle) employed by Longard (R.D.) Services Ltd. was electrocuted and died after performing work on a live electrical system at a job site - The Canadian Electrical Code (CEC) required that repairs or alterations only be carried out on live equipment where complete disconnection of the equipment was not feasible - Longard was charged under s. 74(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) with failing to ensure that an electrical installation was serviced, repaired or dismantled in accordance with the CEC - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court found Longard guilty - There was no question that the CEC was not complied with; the system was energized in circumstances where it was feasible for the work to be done with the electricity turned off - Longard did nothing to ensure compliance with the CEC other than relying on Boyle to work safely and in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements for electrical jobs - There were no protective measures in place - The defence of due diligence was not established - See paragraphs 53 to 60.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Sault Ste. Marie (City), [1978] 2 S.C.R. 1299; 21 N.R. 295, refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Della Valle (J.E.) (2011), 308 N.S.R.(2d) 105; 976 A.P.R. 105; 2011 NSPC 67, refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. O'Regan Chevrolet Cadillac Ltd. (2010), 297 N.S.R.(2d) 8; 943 A.P.R. 8; 2010 NSPC 68, refd to. [para. 45].

R. v. Budd Brothers (1990), 7 C.O.H.S.C. 70, refd to. [para. 49].

R. v. Ledcor Alberta Ltd. (2005), 381 A.R. 204; 2005 ABPC 169, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Gulf of Georgia Towing Co. Ltd., [1979] B.C.J. No. 2064 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 52].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Keith, Norm, Canada Health and Safety Law, p. 10-36.3 [paras. 49, 50].

Counsel:

Peter J. Craig, for the Crown;

Robert C. Hagell, for the defendant.

This matter was heard on February 2-6 and March 9 and 10, 2015, before Derrick, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on April 17, 2015.