Provincial Health And Safety Legislation Is Inapplicable To Federal Undertakings

In Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail c Commission des lésions professionnelles, 2016 QCCS 2424, the Quebec Superior Court held that provincial occupational health and safety legislation does not apply to general contractors working on federal undertakings.

Federal Undertakings

The Constitution Act, 1867 grants the federal government exclusive power to regulate on projects and infrastructure that connect one or more provinces with each other or a foreign country, or are built for the general advantage of Canada as a whole. Railways, highways, waterways, and shipping lanes tend to be federal undertakings. In this case, the St. Lawrence Seaway was the federal undertaking at issue.

Background

The case resulted from thirteen remedial orders under the provincial Occupational Health and Safety Act (the "Act"), issued by the Commission de la santé et du travail (now the Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail, "CNESST") against the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation (the "Corporation"). The Corporation acted as general contractor on construction projects at the St. Lawrence Seaway. The Corporation challenged the orders to the Commission des lesions professionelles ("CLP", now the Tribunal administratif du travail), which revoked the orders, finding that the Act was constitutionally inapplicable to federal undertakings due to the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity.

CNESST applied for judicial review of the CLP's decision, which was heard and dismissed by Justice Claudine Roy of the Superior Court of Quebec in March 2016.

Superior Court's Decision

Justice Roy noted that neither the constitutionality of the Act nor its inapplicability to the federal undertaking as an employer were in dispute. The only issue was whether the Corporation, when acting as a general contractor, becomes subject to the Act.

Justice Roy reviewed the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Commission du Salaire Minimum v Bell Telephone Company of Canada, [1966] SCR 767, which held that only Parliament has jurisdiction to legislate on vital parts of federal undertakings, which include management and operation of the undertaking and labor relations.

The Salaire Minimum decision was affirmed and expanded in the Supreme Court of Canada's trilogy of 1988, namely Bell Canada v Quebec (Commission de la Santé et de la Sécurité du Travail), [1988] 1 RCS 749; Alltrans Express Ltd. v British Columbia...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT