Tessier Ltée v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail), (2012) 430 N.R. 1 (SCC)

JudgeMcLachlin, C.J.C., LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis, JJ.
CourtSupreme Court (Canada)
Case DateMay 17, 2012
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(2012), 430 N.R. 1 (SCC);2012 SCC 23;[2012] 2 SCR 3;[2012] CarswellQue 4108;344 DLR (4th) 385;430 NR 1

Tessier ltée v. WHSCC (2012), 430 N.R. 1 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2012] N.R. TBEd. MY.014

Tessier Ltée (appellant) v. Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (respondent) and Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General of Quebec, Attorney General of British Columbia and Commission des lésions professionnelles (intervenors)

(33935; 2012 SCC 23; 2012 CSC 23)

Indexed As: Tessier Ltée v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail)

Supreme Court of Canada

McLachlin, C.J.C., LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis, JJ.

May 17, 2012.

Summary:

Tessier rented out cranes and other equipment solely in Quebec. Some cranes (14% of revenue and 20% of employee salaries) were used for stevedoring. Tessier employees were fully integrated into its workforce, there being no discrete unit of employees dedicated to stevedoring activities. Tessier applied for a declaration that its activities fell under federal jurisdiction over shipping and that it was, accordingly, not subject to provincial occupational health and safety legislation. The Commission ruled that Tessier's activities fell under provincial jurisdiction. That decision was overturned by the Superior Court, but restored by the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal agreed that Tessier's activities fell under provincial jurisdiction, primarily because its stevedoring activities represented only a minor part of Tessier's overall operation, Tessier did not have a discrete stevedoring division and no evidence was adduced of the nature of Tessier's contractual or organization relationships with the federal shipping companies it serviced. Tessier appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal. The court rejected Tessier's argument that any company with employees engaged in stevedoring should be federally regulated for purposes of labour relations (i.e., direct jurisdiction). This was a case of derivative jurisdiction. The majority of Tessier's activities were devoted to provincially regulated activities. Tessier's operational nature was local and its stevedoring activities, which were integrated with its overall operations, constituted a relatively minor part of its overall operations. Provincial occupational health and safety legislation applied.

Constitutional Law - Topic 5954

Federal jurisdiction (s. 91) - Navigation and shipping - Stevedoring - Tessier rented out cranes and other equipment solely in Quebec - Some cranes (14% of revenue and 20% of employee salaries) were used for stevedoring - Tessier employees were fully integrated into its workforce, there being no discrete unit of employees dedicated to stevedoring activities - Tessier sought a declaration that its activities fell under federal jurisdiction over shipping and that it was, accordingly, not subject to provincial occupational health and safety legislation - The Supreme Court of Canada rejected Tessier's argument that any company with employees engaged in stevedoring should be federally regulated for purposes of labour relations (i.e., direct jurisdiction) - This was a case of derivative jurisdiction - The majority of Tessier's activities were devoted to provincially regulated activities - Tessier's operational nature was local and its stevedoring activities, which were integrated with its overall operations, constituted a relatively minor part of its overall operations - The court stated that "this appeal is the first time this court has had the opportunity to assess the constitutional consequences when the employees performing the work do not form a discrete unit and are fully integrated into the related operation. It seems to me that even if the work of those employees is vital to the functioning of a federal undertaking, it will not render federal an operation that is otherwise local if the work represents an insignificant part of the employees' time or is a minor aspect of the essential ongoing nature of the operation. ... If Tessier itself was an inter-provincial transportation undertaking, it would be justified in assuming that the percentage of its activities devoted to local versus extra-provincial transportation would not be relevant ... But since Tessier can only qualify derivatively as a federal undertaking, federal jurisdiction is only justified if the federal activity is a significant part of its operation." - Tessier's employees were governed by provincial occupational health and safety legislation.

Constitutional Law - Topic 7075

Provincial jurisdiction (s. 92) - Local works and undertakings - General - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 5954 ].

Constitutional Law - Topic 7289

Provincial jurisdiction (s. 92) - Property and civil rights - Regulatory statutes - Labour relations - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "legislation respecting labour relations is presumptively a provincial matter since it engages the provinces' authority over property and civil rights under s. 92(13) of the Constitution Act ... this court therefore established that the federal government has jurisdiction to regulate employment in two circumstances: when the employment relates to a work, undertaking, or business within the legislative authority of Parliament; or when it is an integral part of a federally regulated undertaking, sometimes referred to as derivative jurisdiction. ... In the case of direct federal labour jurisdiction, we assess whether the work, business or undertaking's essential operation nature brings it within a federal head of power. In the case of derivative jurisdiction, we assess whether that essential operational nature renders the work integral to a federal undertaking. In either case, we determine which level of government has labour relations authority by assessing the work's essential operational nature." - See paragraphs 17 to 18.

Constitutional Law - Topic 7290

Provincial jurisdiction (s. 92) - Property and civil rights - Regulatory statutes - Labour standards - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 5954 ].

Constitutional Law - Topic 7296

Provincial jurisdiction (s. 92) - Property and civil rights - Regulatory statutes - Industrial safety - [See Constitutional Law - Topic 5954 ].

Cases Noticed:

Bell Canada v. Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (Qué.) and Bilodeau et al., [1988] 1 S.C.R. 749; 85 N.R. 295; 15 Q.A.C. 217, refd to. [para. 5].

Toronto Electric Commissioners v. Snider, [1925] A.C. 396 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

NIL/TU,O Child and Family Services Society v. B.C. Government and Service Employees' Union, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 696; 407 N.R. 338; 294 B.C.A.C. 1; 498 W.A.C. 1; 2010 SCC 45, refd to. [para. 11].

Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act, Reference Re, [1955] S.C.R. 529, refd to. [para. 13].

Commission du salaire minimum v. Bell Telephone Co. of Canada, [1966] S.C.R. 767, refd to. [para. 15].

Ontario Hydro v. Labour Relations Board (Ont.), [1993] 3 S.C.R. 327; 158 N.R. 161; 66 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 15].

United Transportation Union et al. v. Central Western Railway Corp., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1112; 119 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 17].

Agence Maritime Inc. v. Conseil canadien des relations ourrières. [1969] S.C.R. 851, refd to. [para. 19].

Montcalm Construction Inc. v. Minimum Wage Commission (Que.) et al., [1979] 1 S.C.R. 754; 25 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 19].

Letter Carriers' Union of Canada v. Canadian Union of Postal Workers, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 178, refd to. [para. 19].

Burrardview Neighbourhood Association v. Vancouver (City) et al., [2007] 2 S.C.R. 86; 362 N.R. 208; 241 B.C.A.C. 1; 399 W.A.C. 1; 2007 SCC 23, refd to. [para. 22].

Miida Electronics Inc. v. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd. and ITO-International Terminal Operators Ltd., [1986] 1 S.C.R. 752; 68 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 23].

Whitbread v. Walley et al., [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1273; 120 N.R. 109, refd to. [para. 23].

Ordon et al. v. Grail, [1998] 3 S.C.R. 437; 232 N.R. 201; 115 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 23].

Waters and Water-Powers, Reference Re, [1929] S.C.R. 200, refd to. [para. 23].

Consolidated Fastfrate Inc. v. Western Canada Council of Teamsters et al., [2009] 3 S.C.R. 407; 395 N.R. 276; 469 A.R. 150; 470 W.A.C. 150; 2009 SCC 53, refd to. [para. 28].

Northern Telecom Ltd. v. Communications Workers of Canada and Canada Labour Relations Board, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 115; 28 N.R. 107, refd to. [para. 37].

Canada Labour Relations Board and Canada (Attorney General) v. L'Anglais (Paul) Inc. et al., [1983] 1 S.C.R. 147; 47 N.R. 351, refd to. [para. 39].

Northern Telecom Canada Ltd. et al. v. Communication Workers of Canada et al. and Canada Labour Relations Board et al. (No. 2), [1983] 1 S.C.R. 733; 48 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 40].

Westcoast Energy Inc. v. National Energy Board et al., [1998] 1 S.C.R. 322; 223 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 44].

Johnson Terminals and Storage Ltd. v. Vancouver Harbour Employees Association Local 517, [1981] 2 F.C. 686 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 49].

Actton Transport Ltd. et al. v. Director of Employment Standards (B.C.) et al. (2010), 287 B.C.A.C. 233; 485 W.A.C. 233; 5 B.C.L.R.(5th) 1; 2010 BCCA 272, refd to. [para. 49].

Consumers' Gas Co. v. National Energy Board (1996), 195 N.R. 150 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 50].

Ontario (Minister of Labour) v. EllisDon Corp. et al. (2008), 246 O.A.C. 101; 304 D.L.R.(4th) 498; 2008 ONCA 789, refd to. [para. 50].

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 348 v. Labour Relations Board (Alta.) et al. (1995), 168 A.R. 204 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 50].

Attorney General for Ontario v. Winner, [1954] A.C. 541, refd to. [para. 51].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Brun, Henri, Tremblay, Guy, and Brouillet, Eugénie, Droit constituionnel (5e éd. 2008), pp. 533, 535 [para. 15]; 544 [para. 50].

Hogg, Peter W., Constitutional Law of Canada (5th Ed. Supp. 2007) (2009 looseleaf update, release 1), p. 22-21 [para. 23].

Patenaude, Micheline, L'entreprise qui fait parties intégrante de l'enterprise fédérale (1991), 32 C. de D. 763, pp. 791 to 799 [para. 50].

Counsel:

André Asselin, Sébastien Gobeil and Maxime-Arnaud Keable, for the appellant;

Pierre-Michel Lajeunesse, for the respondent;

Robin K. Basu and Shannon M. Chace, for the intervenor, Attorney General of Ontario;

Jean-Vincent Lacroix, for the intervenor, Attorney General of Quebec;

Jonathan G. Penner and Freya Zaltz, for the intervenor, Attorney General of British Columbia.

Solicitors of Record:

Fasken Martineau DuMoulin, Québec, Quebec, for the appellant;

Vigneault Thibodeau Bergeron, Québec, Quebec, for the respondent;

Attorney General of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, for the intervenor, Attorney General of Ontario;

Attorney General of Quebec, Québec, Quebec, for the intervenor, Attorney General of Quebec;

Attorney General of British Columbia, Victoria, B.C., for the intervenor, Attorney General of British Columbia.

This appeal was heard on January 17, 2012, before McLachlin, C.J.C., LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.

On May 17, 2012, Abella, J., delivered the following judgment in both official languages for the Court.

To continue reading

Request your trial
41 practice notes
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Constitutional Law. Fifth Edition Conclusion
    • 3 Agosto 2017
    ...................................................... 389 Tessier Ltée v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail), 2012 SCC 23 .................................................................................. 387 Thibaudeau v. Canada, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 627, 124 D.L.R. 449 ......
  • Table Of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Canadian Maritime Law. Second Edition Part VII
    • 21 Junio 2016
    ...513, 760 Tessier Ltée Appellant v Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail, 2012 SCC 23 ....................................... 145, 197, 198, 1101 Thatcher v Schell, 2005 BCSC 1121............................................................ 832, 842 The Annie M Allen (1881), 3 C......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Labour and Employment Law. Cases, Materials, and Commentary. Ninth Edition
    • 24 Junio 2018
    ...Tessier Ltée v Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail) , 2012 SCC 23, [2012] 2 SCR 3 .................................................................................................... 112 Thomson v Deakin, [1952] Ch 646 (CA) .................................................
  • Maritime Law Jurisdiction in Canada
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Canadian Maritime Law. Second Edition Part II
    • 21 Junio 2016
    ...Commissioners v Snider , [1925] AC 396. 139 Reference Re Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act , [1955] SCR 529. 140 2012 SCC 23 [ Tessier ]. PART II: ADMIR ALTY JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURE 198 work argued that provincial occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation did not......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
26 cases
  • Ryan Estate et al. v. Universal Marine Ltd. et al., (2013) 447 N.R. 1 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • 2 Agosto 2013
    ...749; 85 N.R. 295; 15 Q.A.C. 217, refd to. [para. 27]. Tessier Ltée v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail), [2012] 2 S.C.R. 3; 430 N.R. 1; 2012 SCC 23, refd to. [para. Pasiechnyk et al. v. Procrane Inc. et al., [1997] 2 S.C.R. 890; 216 N.R. 1; 158 Sask.R. 81; 153 W.A......
  • Canada (Attorney General) v. Northern Inter-Tribal Health Authority Inc., 2020 FCA 63
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • 17 Marzo 2020
    ...in provincial undertakings, including their pensions, are presumptively subject to provincial regulation: Tessier Ltée v. Quebec, 2012 SCC 23, [2012] 2 S.C.R. 3 at para. 11; Consolidated Fastfrate Inc. v. Western Canada Council of Teamsters, 2009 SCC 53, [2009] 3 S.C.R. 407 at paras 27-30; ......
  • Quebec (Attorney General) v. Picard, 2020 FCA 74
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • 15 Abril 2020
    ...of Teamsters, 2009 SCC 53, [2009] 3 S.C.R 407; NIL/TU,O; Tessier Ltée v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail), 2012 SCC 23, [2012] 2 S.C.R 3. [24] The applicable principles were helpfully summarized by Justice Dickson (on behalf of a unanimous Court) at page 132 of N......
  • Ryan Estate et al. v. Universal Marine Ltd. et al., (2013) 339 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 312 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • 2 Agosto 2013
    ...749; 85 N.R. 295; 15 Q.A.C. 217, refd to. [para. 27]. Tessier Ltée v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail), [2012] 2 S.C.R. 3; 430 N.R. 1; 2012 SCC 23, refd to. [para. Pasiechnyk et al. v. Procrane Inc. et al., [1997] 2 S.C.R. 890; 216 N.R. 1; 158 Sask.R. 81; 153 W.A......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 firm's commentaries
  • Tessier v. Québec: Supreme Court Tightens Derivative Federal Jurisdiction Over Employment
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 24 Agosto 2012
    ...The boundaries of these established exceptions were recently tested in Tessier Ltée v. Québec (Commission des lesions professionnelles), 2012 SCC 23 [Tessier]. The appellant in that case, Tessier Ltée, was a Québec-based transportation company that performed the majority of its work within ......
  • Labour Relations Of A Stevedoring Undertaking Not Directly Subject To Federal Jurisdiction Says Supreme Court
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 31 Mayo 2012
    ...please contact Sébastien Gobeil at 418-640-2032. Footnote 1 Tessier Ltée v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail), 2012 SCC 23 www.fasken.com The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought a......
  • The Supreme Court Tackles Questions Of Jurisdiction
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 24 Junio 2012
    ...Tessier v. Québec (Commission de la santé et sécurité du travail), 2012 SCC 23 the Supreme Court of Canada tackled an important issue relating to the division of powers as they relate to labour relations. In this decision, handed down on May 17, 2012, the Supreme Court was tasked with decid......
  • SCC Addresses Test For 'Federal Undertakings' Under The Constitution
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • 13 Junio 2012
    ...under s. 92(10) of the Constitution Act. Case Information Tessier Ltéev. v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail), 2012 SCC 23 Supreme Court Docket: Decision Date: May 17, 2012 The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Constitutional Law. Fifth Edition Conclusion
    • 3 Agosto 2017
    ...................................................... 389 Tessier Ltée v. Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail), 2012 SCC 23 .................................................................................. 387 Thibaudeau v. Canada, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 627, 124 D.L.R. 449 ......
  • Table Of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Canadian Maritime Law. Second Edition Part VII
    • 21 Junio 2016
    ...513, 760 Tessier Ltée Appellant v Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail, 2012 SCC 23 ....................................... 145, 197, 198, 1101 Thatcher v Schell, 2005 BCSC 1121............................................................ 832, 842 The Annie M Allen (1881), 3 C......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Labour and Employment Law. Cases, Materials, and Commentary. Ninth Edition
    • 24 Junio 2018
    ...Tessier Ltée v Quebec (Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail) , 2012 SCC 23, [2012] 2 SCR 3 .................................................................................................... 112 Thomson v Deakin, [1952] Ch 646 (CA) .................................................
  • Maritime Law Jurisdiction in Canada
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Canadian Maritime Law. Second Edition Part II
    • 21 Junio 2016
    ...Commissioners v Snider , [1925] AC 396. 139 Reference Re Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act , [1955] SCR 529. 140 2012 SCC 23 [ Tessier ]. PART II: ADMIR ALTY JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURE 198 work argued that provincial occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation did not......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT