Canada: "Smith v. Inco": Environmental Class Action First

The July 6, 2010 decision of the Ontario Superior Court in Smith v. Inco is Canada's first environmental class action trial decision from a common law province. The Court awarded $36 million to approximately 7000 property owners for loss in property values attributable to nuisance and strict liability, arising from nickel contamination.

The Plaintiffs alleged that nickel emissions from Inco's Port Colborne refinery caused soil contamination on neighbouring properties. Public disclosures regarding the nickel contamination in September 2000 were alleged to have negatively affected values of class members' properties.

The Court was faced with the difficult task of adjudicating a claim twenty six years after the Inco refinery operations were concluded — more recent public announcements were alleged to have triggered a decline in property values in Port Colborne.

The Court's decision may be vulnerable on appeal in that Inco had not caused new contamination for 16 years at the time of the public disclosures; the fact of the contamination was arguably known prior to 2000 creating limitations issues; and the market evidence does not appear to establish on a balance of probabilities a causal connection between the loss in property values and the public disclosure.

Claims Not Statute-Barred

Inco operated its property as a refinery between 1918 and 1984, when it ceased all refining. It was common ground that the nickel contamination found on neighbouring properties largely originated from the Inco refinery. There were no new deposits by Inco after 1984. The Ministry of Environment (MOE) commenced testing of air, vegetation and soil in the 1970s. The MOE tested the surrounding soils in 1972, 1975, 1983, 1991 and 1998.

In November 1976, the MOE published the results of soil tests taken at 21 properties in the vicinity of Inco. The readings ranged between 3,000 and 6,000 parts-per-million (ppm), with one reading at 16,500 ppm. Elsewhere most readings were in the range of 1,000 to 6,000 ppm with one reading of 24,000 ppm. These were substantial exceedences measured against the MOE guideline of 200 ppm. It is not clear whether individual owners received copies of the report, although it is expected that they would have been entitled to the results.

An owner reviewing the report would have been alerted to the fact that there were nickel deposits exceeding the MOE standard by as much as 120 times. It is strongly arguable that knowledge of the exceedence is knowledge of the property damage sufficient to found a claim.

After Inco shut down its refining operations in 1984, the MOE conducted further studies. In 1991, the MOE performed a large scale study to determine the nickel soil footprint around Inco. A July 1994 report concluded that the "soil to at least 10 centimetres in depth was severely contaminated with nickel". Severe contamination is property damage. Nickel in the soil exceeded the MOE guideline in 36 of 37 test sites. The highest reading was 9,750 ppm southwest of the refinery, relative to the guideline level of 200 ppm. Property owners who had made a specific complaint would have received a copy of the report. However, there were no studies linking the property damage to health risks at that time. A copy of the report was available in the Port Colborne library.

A 1998 MOE study of 80 properties released in January 2000 showed nickel levels exceeding 14,000 ppm in certain properties, while the guideline level for nickel contamination remained at 200 ppm. The MOE then initiated a human health risk assessment (HHRA). The 2000 MOE report showed two nickel hot spots, the highest levels of concentration being in the range of 15,000 ppm. The judge took that report as the beginning of time for discovering the claim.

In March 2002, as a result of the HHRA a soil "intervention level" for nickel was set at 8,000 ppm to "protect toddler aged children". Inco was ordered by MOE to remediate properties with a nickel level higher than 8,000 ppm. Twenty-five properties were designated for remediation. All except the representative Plaintiff's property have been remediated.

The Court concluded that publication of results by the MOE and the Public Health Department triggered the Plaintiff's claim to damages. The Plaintiff lead evidence that the publication resulted in a drop in property values. The Court appears to have conflated the damage completed no later than 1984 by Inco, with the publication of test results by governmental bodies 16 years later. The Court accepted that the average person in the class could not reasonably have known about the impact on property value until 2000. However, the better question would have been, could a Plaintiff class member reasonably have known that their property was damaged prior to 2000? Based on the MOE publications, it would have been possible for the Court to conclude that such knowledge was available.

Rylands v. Fletcher Liability Found

The Plaintiff's claim had two common law bases. Firstly, the court found that Inco was strictly liable for bringing nickel onto its land to refine it and creating airborne nickel particles which were deposited on neighbouring properties. These deposits constituted a non-natural use of the property and created an increased danger to others, satisfying the first element of Rylands v. Fletcher strict liability. The nickel deposits had the potential to do damage, satisfying the second element of Rylands.

The trial judge specifically rejected Inco's argument that Rylands v. Fletcher is restricted to an isolated escape. The judge concluded that if an unnatural substance is brought onto a property which creates a potential danger for a neighbour, and the substance escapes and causes damage, then there is no reason to restrict Rylands v. Fletcher to a single isolated escape. Further, he explained that strict liability supplants negligence and nuisance for "abnormally dangerous activities."


The Plaintiff also sought damages for injury to property caused by Inco's nuisance. The judge accepted that physical damage was caused by the deposit of nickel onto the soil. The judge concluded that physical damage to the neighbouring properties was "material" if the amount that accumulated was such as to negatively affect the value of the property. Inco unsuccessfully argued that a class member is not entitled to make a claim for diminution of property value unless they had sold or attempted to sell the property. On an alternative analysis, the Court could have found that property was damaged when it was "severely contaminated"; however, this analysis would have likely resulted in the claims being out of time.


The judge assumed "two common sense causal connections" existed as between negative publicity regarding soil contamination and property values:

  1. The value of residential property is reduced if located close to a large industrial operation. Depression of values existed long before any negative publicity about nickel in the soil in Port Colborne.
  2. Environmental contamination in a community negatively affects residential property values.


While the trial held that negative publicity and public disclosures of the nickel contamination starting in the year 2000 logically caused a negative effect on residential property values in Port Colborne, the expert evidence also suggested other trends that may not have been fully canvassed by the Court. The Plaintiff's expert used Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) data from 1996 to 2008 to do a statistical analysis comparing changes in property values in Port Colborne with those in Welland, a neighbouring community. The MPAC data showed that property values in Port Colborne actually increased between 1996 and 2003, relative to Welland. After 2003, the increase in values in Port Colborne slowed down relative to Welland. The continued increase in values may not be consistent with the publications in 2000 triggering a loss in property value. It suggests the influence of other market factors that are not reflected in the Court's decision.

The defence tendered evidence that Port Colborne property values actually outperformed Welland sale prices after 2004. This suggests that there was no permanent loss in value to the Port Colborne properties. The trial concluded that the Plaintiff had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the negative publicity and public disclosures after September 2000 significantly affected property values in an area closest to the refinery, somewhat less so further away from the refinery, and had only a slight effect on the property values in another segment further still from the refinery.

The current decision does not address who will be entitled to the receipt of the damages. Many of the properties may have changed hands between 2000 and the date of trial. Further transfers between the date of the decision, and a likely appeal, can also be anticipated, exacerbating the difficulty of making this determination.

About BLG

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions