News & Publications

Environmental and OHS Class Actions: Playing for "Keeps"

Submitted By Firm: McLennan Ross, LLP

Contact(s): Gerhard Seifner, Glenn D. Tait


Stuart W. Chambers

Date Published: 4/16/2012

Article Type: Legal Article

Share This:

Many heavy industry companies operating in Canada require licences from environmental regulatory authorities where their operations may have an impact on the environment. They must also comply with federal, provincial and municipal environmental laws. Further, all companies have a general obligation to reasonably ensure the health and safety of their employees. When an environmental or OHS incident occurs, the company responsible may face charges or other penalties under “Health, Safety and Environment” legislation. However, their liability may not be confined to the regulatory arena – companies may face exposure to lawsuits claiming damages arising from these same activities. In fact, even if the activity in question was properly licenced, that would not automatically protect the company from civil judgments against it. And when the lawsuits are advanced as class actions, the costs of defending and the scope of damages awarded by the court may ultimately ruin the company. A class action is a hard fight, one often played for “keeps”.

The landscape of civil litigation in Canada was fundamentally altered by the introduction of
provincial class action legislation, commencing in B.C., Ontario and Quebec in the 1990s and now
encompassing almost every province and territory. Alberta’s legislation came into force in 2004.

A class action is in most respects the same as any other civil lawsuit. However, a critical distinction
is that upon Court approval or “certification”, the action proceeds on the instruction of an identified
representative Plaintiff (or several, in the case of sub-classes) on behalf of all members of the class.
Class members who do not opt out of the litigation (in most cases - some jurisdictions such as B.C.
provide for “opting in” by non-residents in order to be bound) are bound by the outcome of the
litigation. The principal rationales for class actions include the efficiency of combining numerous
proceedings into one action, the saving of scarce judicial resources by doing so, and an enhanced
ability to access justice on the part of individual litigants. Commencing separate actions would often
be uneconomic, in particular where the claims are, on an individual basis, small. However,
aggregated on behalf of a large class, claims can become a formidable threat to Defendants.

Although class actions are generally conceived in the context of product liability suits and, more
recently, securities issues, they may also have an impact in areas more traditionally addressed
through regulatory rather than civil litigation proceedings. For instance, environmental issues have
of late have become more prominent in the class proceedings arena.

A recent example is the 2011 decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Smith v. Inco Limited. In
this case, the class comprised all residents of the Ontario municipality of Port Colborne. The claims
related to damages alleged to have been suffered resulting from the operation of a nickel refinery in
that community by the Defendant. Specifically, the damages alleged were not human health effects
or soil contamination, but rather, that property values in Port Colborne had not appreciated as
quickly as in neighbouring, comparable communities.

This action was certified by the Ontario courts as a class action and proceeded to trial. Although the
class was largely successful at trial, the judgment in its favour was overturned by the Ontario Court
of Appeal in the fall of 2011, on a number of legal and factual bases. As I noted in my article in the
Winter 2011 edition of the McLennan Ross Legal Counsel, this action is of potentially great
significance to environmental class proceedings, given its restrictive application of the limitations
legislation (the laws that require a lawsuit to be started within a specified period of time after the
injured party becomes aware, or should have become aware, that they have a claim to advance – in
Alberta, generally two years). In brief, the lower Courts found that the limitation period only began
to run against the Class upon the publication by government authorities of health concerns
associated with nickel contamination. However, the Court of Appeal found that whether or not the
individual class members knew of the potential for a claim of property damages associated with
such risks, was an individual issue and could not proceed as a class action.

Alberta has also seen environmental issues addressed through class proceedings. In Paron v.
Alberta (Environmental Protection)
, the Court denied a certification application brought on behalf
of cottage owners of Wabamun Lake. The class action intended to seek damages and an injunction
for thermal pollution attributed to an electrical engineering plant operated near the lake, which
allegedly interfered with the cottage owners’ enjoyment and value of their properties. Another
Alberta action, Windsor v. Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd., was certified on behalf of a class of
landowners in the Ogden community of Calgary who claimed that contamination had flowed from
the Defendant’s operating site to the groundwater beneath their homes and commercial properties,
reducing their values.

The above are simply three examples of environmental issues which have led not only to litigation,
rather than (or in addition to) the intervention of the environmental regulators, but to a class
proceeding on behalf of a group of allegedly impacted landowners. In two of the three described
cases, certification was granted (although in the Inco decision, the Court of Appeal dramatically
restricted the scope of certification by classifying certain issues as not suitable for a class action).
Accordingly, there continues to be every reason to believe that the class action tool will be used by
environmental law practitioners on behalf of their clients, to advance claims that might not be
economic or feasible on an individual basis. Further, this provides a powerful tool to redress
environmental issues, where impacted land owners and others are not satisfied with the steps taken by the environmental regulatory authorities. Indeed, as I noted in my Spring 2009 article in Legal Counsel, the Supreme Court of Canada has held that compliance with environmental regulations and licencing does not necessarily preclude liability in damages to, for example, neighbouring landowners who are adversely affected by a company’s operations. Therefore, an operator may be exposed to civil lawsuits, including class actions, even where it has complied with all applicable environmental regulations and no regulatory enforcement is taking place.

By contrast, we do not see in Canada any significant development of class actions in the
occupational health and safety field. At first blush, this appears somewhat odd. Occupational health
and safety issues can similarly affect groups of claimants such as employees, and indeed can have
precisely the same effect on such groups of claimants, all of which would appear to be well suited to
the class proceeding mechanism. However, on further review it becomes clear that occupational
health and safety class proceedings in Canada are generally not feasible. This is primarily due to thepresence of workers’ compensation legislation in all provinces. Workers’ compensation legislation provides compensation to workers who are injured on the job, on a no-fault basis. However, the statutory trade-off for this compensation is that workers are generally not permitted to pursuelitigation against their employers in relation to those same injuries. For instance, although theAlberta legislation permits the Workers’ Compensation Board (“WCB”) to allow an injured worker
to sue third parties who are not covered by the Workers’ Compensation Act (“WCA”), such consent
is rarely granted. Where it is granted, the WCB can maintain significant control over the prosecution including the ability to direct counsel and to deny approval to any settlement.Furthermore, the WCB is entitled to bring that same action in the name of the worker without his or her consent. However, as with all administrative bodies, the WCB cannot exercise its powers unless there is a reasonable basis to do so. Thus, as Professor Garry Watson of Osgoode Law School noted, the existence of workers’ compensation legislation in Canada explains why Canada, unlike the United States, has not had asbestos litigation.

Professor Watson’s conclusion is illustrated by the recent Alberta decision of Stewart v. Enterprise
Universal Inc
., where the Defendant sought a summary dismissal of a class action lawsuit relating
to illness allegedly arising from asbestos exposure. The Defendant, Enterprise, had already pled
guilty to one count of violating Alberta’s Occupational Health and Safety Act. Enterprise was
successful in arguing that the action should be dismissed on the basis that workers’ compensation
legislation barred the Court action.

A further roadblock to occupational health and safety claims in Canada relates to the ability of the
Crown to protect itself from liability in the same manner as workers’ compensation legislative
schemes protect private employers. In this regard, proposed class proceedings have been denied
certification in Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and New Brunswick respecting persons alleged to
have been harmed by the spraying of defoliating chemical agents. One of the reasons specified by
the Newfoundland Court of Appeal for denying certification was that a majority of the proposed
class members were likely barred by federal legislation limiting the liability of the Crown, on the
similar basis to workers’ compensation statutes. Essentially, federal legislation insulated the federalCrown from any actions where pension or compensation had been paid in respect of the particular injury or damage. In the case of these “Agent Orange” injuries, the Canada Pension Act had provided for payments to service members in connection with injuries or diseases suffered arising out of, or directly connected with, military service. Interestingly, Professor Watson suggests in hisarticle that the existence of specific or “ad hoc” government compensation schemes may well be a response to the institution of class actions. In other words, government finance compensatory
packages (such as those resulting from Hepatitis C claims against the national blood banks system),may well be a response – or a preventative measure in relation – to class actions.

A potential avenue for civil liability may arise indirectly, through possible impacts on family
members, friends or close contacts of injured workers. As an example, if family members ofworkers suffering from asbestos-related illness were proven to have suffered illness themselves as a
result of such asbestos contamination, it would appear an open question at present in Canada as to
whether the employer could in that situation be found liable to the injured family members if they
brought a class action. Certainly, legislation such as the WCA would not appear to preclude such a
lawsuit from being launched, because the injured parties would not be “workers” as defined under
that legislation nor would their injuries appear to have arisen “in the course of employment”. It
remains to be seen whether such lawsuits will be brought in Canada and, if so, whether or not they
would be successful – it is expected that it would be very difficult in most cases to prove a causal
chain of connection between the asbestos contamination, the health of the workers, and the health of the family members bringing the litigation. In addition, the employer would presumably challenge
the certification of such an action on the basis that all injuries would have to be individually proven
and assessed. On the other hand, the costs of defending class actions, and the risk that such
aggregated claims pose to companies of even significant means, is such that even actions with
greater evidentiary hurdles to overcome must be taken very seriously.

In sum, while class actions appear to be the “wave of the future” in litigation generally, and in the
environmental regulatory field specifically, it would appear that in the context of occupational
health and safety injuries, those suffering damages will have to continue to have their losses
addressed through either workers’ compensation legislation or government compensation packages.It would not appear likely that Canada will see the proliferation of compensation claims over such issues as asbestos exposure as we have seen in the United States to date.

Find an Employment Lawyer

View or print a complete ELA member list »

Client Successes

Altra Industrial Motion Inc.

Altra Industrial Motion Inc. has multiple locations in the U.S., as well as Central America, Europe, and Asia. The Employment Law Alliance has proved to be a great asset in assisting us in dealing with employment issues and matters in such diverse venues as Mexico, Australia, and Spain. We have obtained excellent results using the ELA network for matters ranging from a multi-state review of employment policies to assisting with individual employment issues in a variety of foreign jurisdictions.

In one instance, we were faced with an employment dispute with a former associate in Mexico that had the potential for substantial economic exposure. The matter had been pending for over a year, and we were not confident in the employment advice we had been receiving. I obtained a referral to the ELA counsel in Mexico, who was able to obtain a favorable resolution of the dispute in only a few days. Based on our experiences with the ELA, we would not hesitate to use its many resources for future employment law needs.

American University in Bulgaria

In my career I have been a practicing attorney, counsel to the Governor of Maine, and CEO of a major public utility. I have worked with many lawyers in many settings. When the American University in Bulgaria needed help with employment litigation in federal court in Syracuse, New York, we turned to Pierce Atwood, the ELA member we knew and trusted in Maine, for a referral. We were extremely pleased with the responsiveness and high quality of service we received from Bond Schoeneck & King, the ELA's firm in upstate New York. I would not hesitate to recommend the ELA to any employer.

David T. Flanagan
Member of Board of Trustees 

Arcata Associates

I really enjoyed the Conducting an Effective Internal Investigation in the United States webinar.  We are in the midst of a rather delicate employee relations issue in California right now and the discussion helped me tremendously.  It also reinforced things that you tend to forget if you don't do these investigations frequently.  So, many, many thanks to the Employment Law Alliance for putting that webinar together.  It was extremely beneficial.

Lynn Clayton
Vice President, Human Resources

Barrett Business Services, Inc.

I recently participated in the ELA-sponsored webinar on the Employee Free Choice Act.  I was most impressed with that presentation.  It was extremely helpful and very worthwhile.  I have also been utilizing the ELA's online Global Employer Handbook.  This compliance tool is absolutely terrific. 

I am familiar with several other products that purport to provide up-to- date employment law information and I believe that this resource is superior to other similar compliance manuals.  I am delighted that the ELA provides this free to its members' clients.

Boyd Coffee Company

Employment Law Alliance (ELA) has provided Boyd Coffee Company with a highly valued connection to resources, important information and learning. With complex operations and employees working in approximately 20 states, we are continually striving to keep abreast of specific state laws, many of which vary from state to state. We have participated in the ELA web seminars and have found the content very useful. We appreciate the ease, cost effectiveness and quality of the content and presenters offered by these web seminars.  The Global Employer Handbook has provided our company with a very helpful overview of legal issues in the various states in which we operate, and the network of attorneys has helped us manage issues that have arisen in states other than where our Roastery and corporate headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon.

Capgemini Outsourcing Services GmbH

As an international operating outsourcing and consulting supplier Capgemini has used firms of the Employment Law Alliance in Central Europe. We were always highly satisfied with the quality of employment law advice and the responsiveness. I can really recommend the ELA lawyers.

Hirschfeld Kraemer

As an employment lawyer based in San Francisco, I work closely with high tech clients with operations around the globe. Last year, one of my clients needed to implement a workforce reduction in a dozen countries simultaneously. And they gave me 48 hours to accomplish this. I don't know how I could have pulled this off without the resources of the ELA. I don't know of any single law firm that could have made this happen. My client received all of the help they needed in a timely fashion and on a cost effective basis.

Stephen J. Hirschfeld

Hollywood Entertainment Corporation

As the Vice President for Litigation & Associate General Counsel for my company, I need to ensure that we have a team of top-notch employment lawyers in place in every jurisdiction where we do business. And I want to be confident that those lawyers know our business so they don't have to reinvent the wheel when a new legal matter arises. With more than 3400 stores and 35,000 employees operating in all 50 U.S. states and across Canada, we rely on the ELA to partner with us to help accomplish our objectives. I have been delighted with the consistent high quality of the work performed by ELA lawyers. I encourage other in-house counsel to use their services, as well.

Ingram Micro

Ingram Micro is the world's largest technology distributor, providing sales, marketing, and logistics services for the IT industry around the globe. With over 13,000 employees working throughout the U.S. and in 35 international countries, we need employment lawyers who we can count on to ensure global legal compliance. Our experience with many multi-state and multi-national law firms is that their employment law services are not always a high priority for them, and many do not have experts in many of their offices. The ELA has assembled an excellent team of highly skilled employment lawyers, wherever and whenever I need them, and they have proven to be an invaluable resource to our company.

Konami Gaming

Our company, Konami Gaming, Inc., is growing rapidly in a very diverse and highly regulated industry. We are aggressively entering new markets outside the domestic U.S., including Canada and South America. I have had the recent opportunity to utilize the services provided by the ELA. The legal advice was both responsive and professional. Most of all, the entire process was seamless since our Nevada attorney coordinated the services and legal advice requested. I look forward to working with the ELA in the future, as it serves as a great resource to the legal community.

Jennifer Martinez
Vice President, Human Resources

Nikkiso Cryo, Inc.

Until recently, I was unaware of the ELA's existence. We have subsidiaries and affiliates throughout the United States, as well as in Asia, the Middle East and Europe. When a recent legal issue arose in Texas, our long-time Nevada counsel, who is a member of the ELA, suggested that this matter be handled by his ELA colleague in Dallas. We are very pleased with the quality and timeliness of services provided by that firm, and we are excited to now have the ELA as an important asset to help us address employment law issues worldwide.

Palm, Inc.

The ELA network has been immensely important to our company in helping us address an array of human resources challenges around the world. I strongly encourage H.R. executives who have employees located in many different jurisdictions to utilize the ELA's unparalleled expertise and geographic coverage.

Stacy Murphy
Former Senior Director of Human Resources

Rich Products

As the General Counsel for a company with 6,500 employees operating across the U.S. and in eight countries, it is critical that I have top quality lawyers on the ground where we do business. The ELA is an indispensable resource. It has taken the guesswork out of finding the best employment counsel wherever we have a problem.

Jill K. Bond
Senior Vice President/General Counsel, Shared Services and Benefits

Ricoh Americas Corporation

We have direct sales and service offices all over the U.S., but have not necessarily had the need in the past for assistance with legal work in every state where we have a business presence. From time to time, we suddenly find ourselves facing a legal issue in a state where we have no outside counsel relationship. It has been a real benefit to know that the ELA has assembled such an impressive team of experts throughout the U.S. and overseas.

A few years ago, we faced a very tough discrimination lawsuit in Mississippi. We had never had to retain a lawyer there before. I was absolutely delighted with the Mississippi ELA firm. We received an excellent result. They will no doubt handle all of our employment law matters in Mississippi in the future. I have also obtained the assistance of several other ELA firms around the U.S. and have received the same outstanding service. The ELA is a tremendous resource for our company.

Roberts-Gordon LLC

Our affiliated companies have used the Employment Law Alliance in connection with numerous acquisitions, and have always been extremely pleased with our ability to obtain the highest quality legal advice on due diligence issues from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. We have found the Employment Law Alliance firms to be not only first rate with respect to their legal advice but also responsive and timely in assisting us with federal and state law issues critical to our due diligence efforts. We consider the Employment Law Alliance to be an important part of our team.

Rockwell Collins, Inc.

We have partnered with many ELA firms on the development and execution of case management strategies with very positive results. We have been very pleased with the legal advice and counsel provided by the law firms we have utilized who are affiliated with the Employment Law Alliance. The ELA firms we have worked with are customer focused, responsive, and thorough in their approach to handling labor and employment law matters.

Elizabeth Daly
Assistant General Counsel


Sanmina-SCI has facilities strategically located in key regions throughout the world. Our customers expect that we will provide them with the highest quality and most sophisticated services in the marketplace. We have that same expectation for the lawyers with whom we do business. With operations in 17 countries, we need to be certain that we have a team of lawyers working together to address our employment law needs worldwide. The ELA has delivered exactly what it promised-- seamless and consistent high quality services delivered in each locale around the globe. It has quickly become a key asset for our human resources department.


We own, manage, and franchise hotels throughout the U.S. and in more than 90 countries. With more than 145,000 employees worldwide, ensuring that we comply with the complex web of local labor and employment laws in every one of these jurisdictions is a daunting task. The Employment Law Alliance has served as an important resource for us and we have benefited greatly from its expertise and long reach. When a legal dispute or issue has arisen in some far-flung place, Employment Law Alliance lawyers have always provided responsive, practical, and cost-effective assistance.

Wilmington Trust Corporation

Wilmington Trust has used the ELA to locate firms in California, Washington State, Georgia, and Europe. Our experience with the ELA lawyers with whom we have worked has always been one of complete satisfaction and prompt, practical advice.

Michael A. DiGregorio
General Counsel