Section 194 of the Ontario Environmental Protection Act imposes
substantial duties on corporate officers and directors, without
defining who they are. It is essential for people to know
whether these duties and this environmental liability applies to
them. If, as the Ministry of the Environment claims, section 18 of
the Act imposes absolute liability on officers and directors for
corporate environmental problems, it is even more urgent to
know who is, and who is not, an "officer" of any
corporation, whether private, municipal, or other. For example, is
an environmental manager an "officer" within the meaning
of the EPA?
In R. v. 349977 Ontario Inc. o/a Lacombe
Waste 2013 CarswellOnt 11137 at para
53, the MOE charged an environmental manager of a waste management corporation with
numerous corporate waste management offences, arguing that he was
an "officer" of the corporation. He was not listed
as an "officer" or "director" on any of the
official records that the corporation filed under the Ontario Business Corporations
Act. During the trial, the MOE alleged that the
environmental manager was an "officer" of the corporation
for the purposes of the Environmental Protection Act, and
that section 194 could therefore be used as a benchmark of his
The appeal judge ruled that the environmental manager was not an
"officer" within the meaning of the EPA. He was
acquitted of all the charges; the Crown had not proven that he
participated in any of the offences or knew about them at the time
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 Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
It is relatively common knowledge that the government has a "duty to consult" aboriginal groups when undertaking actions or making decisions that could adversely affect aboriginal rights, aboriginal title and treaty rights.
On April 5, 2017, Environment and Climate Change Canada released the report of an external Expert Panel that was established in August 2016 to review the scope and process of federal environmental assessments under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.
40 to 60 years may be too old when determining whether to extend a limitation period for a negligence-based environmental contamination claim, the court recently ruled in Brookfield Residential (Alberta) LP (Carma Developers LP) v Imperial Oil Limited, 2017 ABQB 218 [Brookfield].
Our April 7 post on the report of the Expert Panel reviewing federal environmental assessment processes noted that the report contains recommendations for greater inclusion of Indigenous peoples in federal environmental assessment processes.
Over the past week, the Project Law Blog has been discussing the recommendations set out by the Expert Panel in its report entitled Building Common Ground – A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada, The Final Report of the Expert Panel for the Review of Environmental Assessment Processes.
On April 5, 2017 the Federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change received her report from an expert panel of four, comprised of three lawyers with significant environmental and aboriginal law experience as well as a retired senior executive of a resource company.
On April 5, 2017, an Expert Panel established by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change (the "Panel") released its report, Building Common Ground – A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada, The Final Report of the Expert Panel for the Review of Environmental Assessment Processes (the "Report").
Last week we summarized the recommendations set out by the Expert Panel established by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in its report entitled Building Common Ground – A New Vision for Impact Assessment in Canada, The Final Report of the Expert Panel for the Review of Environmental Assessment Processes.
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).