HR Blog

HR Blog
Court Confirms No Free Standing Civil Action for Breaching OHSA
|
Published on October 22, 2012 | |
Stringer LLP Admin |
Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice has affirmed the long-standing principle that you cannot sue for a free-standing violation of a statute. When a plaintiff is seeking civil damages, often they must demonstrate that the defendant actually owed a duty, which when breached caused the plaintiff’s damages. Plaintiff’s will sometimes rely on the existence of a statutory duty to demonstrate the standard of care to be reasonably expected. However, unless legislation provides otherwise, the courts have long held that private disputes cannot be based solely on a breach of statutory duty. The rationale for this principle is that the government has created a regulatory scheme, by which non-compliant parties are then subject to regulatory enforcement and prosecution.
In Ekpenyong v. Versacold Logistics, Mr. Ekpenyong was employed by a temporary employment agency which dispatched him to work at Versacold. He made a number of allegations (none of which were heard or substantiated by the court) that employees and supervisors at Versacold had failed to report accidents, to comply with health and safety legislation, and had harassed him when he attempted to bring the issues to light.
Versacold brought a motion for summary judgment on a number of grounds. The court struck the pleadings and dismissed the action on the basis that Mr. Ekpenyong’s claim amounted to a number of free-standing allegations concerning violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Employment Standards Act, and were in general frivolous and vexatious. The court also rejected his submission that there had been an implied employment contract between himself and Versacold, and found that although he pleaded violations of his human rights, those allegations had been made baldly, without sufficient basis to ground a cause of action.
Query, would the results have been different if he had brought an action against the staffing agency, or filed reprisal allegations at the Ontario Labour Relations Board?
occupational health and safety
Subscribe to Blog feed
Recent Blog
- Court of Appeal Case Shows Risks of Gaps in WSIB Coverage of Executives
- Specific Termination Provision Upheld After Sale of Business
- Discipline Warranted for Work Refusal Complaint Not Made in Good Faith
- Dealing effectively with OHS inspectors
- AODA compliance: Benefits of Being Ahead of the Game
- Responding to human rights harassment complaints: Guidelines from the HRTO
- How NOT to Draft an Enforceable Non-Competition Agreement
- So Your AODA Customer Service Standard Report is Past Due?
- Announcing our Complimentary Quarterly Roundup Webinar
- New Developments in Immigration Law for Skilled Trades
- New Employment Contract Term Triggers Constructive Dismissal
- Registration Now Open - Managing the Employment Lifecycle Webinar Series
- Where WSIB Benefits Denied Civil Claim May Proceed
- Alberta Human Rights Tribunal Awards Five Years of Back Pay and Reinstatement
- Stringer LLP Obtains $100K Retroactive NEER Adjustment in WSIAT Appeal
- Ontario Court of Appeal Overturns Blue Mountain Accident Reporting Decision
- Make Sure Pre-Employment Screening is Complete Before they Start
- Split Hairs and Sector Disputes
- Early Bird Registration is now open for First Reference's Ontario Employment Law Conference
- Early Morning OLRB Ruling Finds Teachers' Planned Day of Protest an Illegal Strike
- Court of Appeal Protects Manager from Personal Liability on Employee Termination
Categories
- aoda
- class actions
- constitutional law
- construction labour relations
- constructive dismissal
- disability benefits
- employment insurance
- employment law
- employment standards
- fiduciary duties
- first nations
- general litigation
- human rights
- immigration
- labour law
- labour relations
- occupational health and safety
- privacy
- restrictive covenants
- stringer llp announcements
- workers' compensation
- wrongful dismissal litigation


