Following a visit by a CNESST inspector to your construction site, or a serious accident or death on site, your company receives a statement of offence under section 237 the Occupational Health and Safety Act (“OHSA”) indicating that it is liable to a fine of between $15,000 and $300,000. Many people will say that it’s just a fine – nothing major – wrong!!
In its decision in 9324-0422 Québec Inc. v. Gestion Paul Daigle Inc., 2017 QCCA 242, the Quebec Court of Appeal has reminded us that caution is in order when it comes to ruling on motions to dismiss at the interlocutory stage, even where a precedent would appear to predetermine the outcome of the proceeding.
As a general rule, a person who has suffered harm can have the person responsible for causing the harm ordered to pay damages by proving fault, harm, and a causal link between the fault and the harm. That rule is tempered however by various other legal rules, and can be further nuanced by the clauses in a contract, particularly in the area of commercial leases.
Employers regularly have to deal with issues involving problem employees, such as persistent absenteeism, inappropriate behaviour or substandard work. Employers often have to intervene to ensure that their organizations function properly.
Set-Off by Tax Authorities Involving Pre-Filing and Post-Bankruptcy Claims: the Court of Appeal Rules
In its decision in Arrangement relatif à Métaux Kitco inc. 2017 QCCA 268, rendered on February 20th, the Quebec Court of Appeal upheld a Quebec Superior Court decision prohibiting Revenu Québec (“RQ”) from setting off input tax credits and refunds (“ITC/ITRs”) allegedly claimed illegally by Kitco Metals Inc. (“Kitco”) before filing a notice of intention to make a proposal to its creditors, against ITC/ITRs generated after the filing of the notice.
Despite the efforts of the legislature and various interveners in the judicial system, major procedural delays are still prevalent in the legal system. The area of disciplinary law is no exception.