Often clients will want to sue on the basis that some statutory or regulatory duty has been breached. This is not an unreasonable expectation and several common law jurisdictions allow for a claim to be made for breach of statutory duty.
Canada, however, does not allow such claims except where expressly authorized by statute. Indeed, today's Court of Appeal decision in Canadian Alliance of Pipeline Landowners' Associations v. Enbridge Pipelines Inc., 2008 ONCA 227 goes so far as to suggest such a cause of action cannot exist -- the law will not develop that way.
The Court writes:
[31] There is no nominate tort of statutory breach in Canada . ...
.[32] Since there is no nominate tort of statutory breach, a statutory obligation – in this case the obligation to pay compensation for damages resulting from the exercise of a pipeline company's statutory powers – cannot itself give rise to a civil cause of action unless the statute which establishes the obligation expressly provides for a right of action: Canada v. Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, [1983] 1 S.C.R. 205 at 225.
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
2 comments:
What would the position when a judge at a exparte on notice application, gives certain injunctive relief to a plaintiff and so doing curtails certain legal rights of the defendants conferred by an Act Of Parliament?
Greetings! I know this is kinda off topic but I
was wondering which blog platform are you using for this site?
I'm getting fed up of Wordpress because I've had problems with hackers
and I'm looking at alternatives for another platform. I would be great if you could point me in the direction of a good platform.
Take a look at my weblog ... height to waist Ratio
Post a Comment