R. v. O'Regan Chevrolet Cadillac Ltd., (2010) 297 N.S.R.(2d) 8 (PC)

• Judge: Williams, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: October 18, 2010
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (2010), 297 N.S.R.(2d) 8 (PC);2010 NSPC 68

R. v. O'Regan Chevrolet Cadillac (2010), 297 N.S.R.(2d) 8 (PC);

    943 A.P.R. 8

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2010] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. DE.012

Her Majesty the Queen (Department of Labour and Workforce Development) v. O'Regan Chevrolet Cadillac Limited

(2056788; 2010 NSPC 68)

Indexed As: R. v. O'Regan Chevrolet Cadillac Ltd.

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Williams, P.C.J.

December 8, 2010.

Summary:

An explosion and fire occurred on the accused's automobile collision centre premises. While an investigation identified a "gun wash barrel" as the point of origin of the explosion and fire, the reasons for both remained indiscernible. An employee suffered significant burn injuries in the explosion and fire and died the next day. The accused pled guilty to failing to take every reasonable precaution to ensure the health and safety of persons at or near the workplace, contrary to ss. 13(1)(a) and 74(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court imposed a global penalty of $38,750, including a fine of $25,000 with a victim surcharge of $3,750, a donation of $5,000 to the Threads of Life Organization and a contribution of $5,000 toward an educational program. The court noted that the accused had contributed $9,000 for a memorial to the employee who died and had spent $19,000 on improvements and investments in safety following the incident.

Trade Regulation - Topic 7905

Industrial safety - Particular offences - Sentences - Failure to ensure health and safety of workers - An explosion and fire occurred on the accused's automobile collision centre premises - While an investigation identified a "gun wash barrel" as the point of origin of the explosion and fire, the reasons for both remained indiscernible - An employee suffered significant burn injuries in the explosion and fire and died the next day - The accused pled guilty to failing to take every reasonable precaution to ensure the health and safety of persons at or near the workplace, contrary to ss. 13(1)(a) and 74(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court imposed a global penalty of $38,750, including a fine of $25,000 with a victim surcharge of $3,750, a donation of $5,000 to the Threads of Life Organization and a contribution of $5,000 toward an educational program - The court noted that the accused had contributed $9,000 for a memorial to the employee who died and had spent $19,000 on improvements and investments in safety following the incident - This case was distinguishable from cases relied on by the Crown where significant fines were imposed due to a causal connection between the death and the company's failure to comply with occupational health and safety legislation - Causation was relevant to penalty - This was not a death-causing infraction case - However, the court stressed that the potential for harm was ever present where employee hazard awareness training was not taken or refreshed and when flammable liquids were not properly labelled or stored - See paragraphs 8 to 39.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Nova Scotia Power Inc. (2008), 271 N.S.R.(2d) 341; 867 A.P.R. 341; 2008 NSPC 72, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Cotton Felts Ltd., [1982] O.J. No. 178 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. General Scrap Iron & Metals Ltd. (2003), 322 A.R. 63 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 7].

Ontario (Minister of Labour) v. Cox Construction Ltd., [2009] O.J. No. 5976, dist. [para.14].

R. v. Bayview-Wellington Homes (Port Union) Inc., [2003] O.J. No. 1111 (C.J.), dist. [para. 14].

R. v. Faure (Bertrand) Components Ltd., [1996] O.J. No. 4848 (C.J. Prov. Div.), dist. [para. 14].

R. v. Canron Inc., [1995] O.J. No. 4311 (C.J. Prov. Div.), dist. [para. 14].

R. v. Canadian MDF Products Co. (2002), 316 A.R. 228 (Prov. Ct.), dist. [para. 14].

R. v. Fiesta Party Rentals (1984) Ltd., [2000] A.J. No. 1679 (Prov. Ct.), dist. [para. 14].

R. v. Petro-Canada, [2008] O.J. No. 5598 (C.J.), dist. [para. 14].

R. v. Meridian Construction Inc. et al. (2005), 237 N.S.R.(2d) 58; 754 A.P.R. 58; 2005 NSPC 40, dist. [para. 14].

R. v. New Glasgow (Town) (2008), 263 N.S.R.(2d) 390; 843 A.P.R. 390; 2008 NSPC 15, dist. [para. 14].

R. v. Leil (A.W.) Cranes & Equipment (1986) Ltd. (2003), 223 N.S.R.(2d) 225; 705 A.P.R. 225 (Prov. Ct.), dist. [para. 14].

R. v. Sutherland (M.), [2009] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 69; 2009 NSPC 21, refd to. [para. 18].

Counsel:

James Clarke, for Her Majesty the Queen, Department of Labour and Workforce Development;

Donald Murray, for O'Regan Chevrolet Cadillac Limited.

This matter was heard at Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, on October 18, 2010, by Williams, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following written decision on December 8, 2010.