Skip to content

Client Update: Who is a constructor?

Mark Tector and Richard Jordan

The Nova Scotia Occupational Health and Safety Act (the “Act”) provides that “contractors” and “constructors” have similar, but not identical, responsibilities, with a “Constructor” having greater authority and more responsibility for the health and safety of those working “at or near a project”. Determining who is or who isn’t a “constructor” has not always been clear. However, two relatively recent decisions from the Nova Scotia Provincial Court have gone a long way in clarifying matters.

Both decisions stemmed from a September 2013 accident during the construction of a new building at Dalhousie University when an unsecured outrigger beam fell several floors and caused catastrophic injuries to a worker.

The first decision from 2016 involved the acquittal of McCarthy’s Roofing of four charges as a result of the accident: R. v. McCarthy’s Roofing Limited, 2016 NSPC 52. Stewart McKelvey provided this analysis with respect to Judge Derrick’s decision.

More recently, Aecon Construction Group was found guilty of breaching the Act and sentenced to a $35,000 fine (plus 15% victim surcharge) and a payment of $15,000 to the Nova Scotia Construction Safety Association so that they could prepare presentations regarding the proper safe assembly, disassembly, securing and storing of swing stages. Judge Lenehan’s 68-page decision found that Aecon was a constructor and it had breached the “general duty” provision of the Act, which required it to take every precaution reasonable to ensure the health and safety of a person at a workplace.

Judge Lenehan’s decision is significant for employers for two reasons:

  1. As noted above, the differences in responsibilities under the Act between a contractor and a constructor are a little unclear. Following McCarthy’s Roofing, the Aecon decision provides further guidance on how the Court will assess whether an entity is a constructor, which is defined in the Act as “a person who contracts for work on a project or who undertakes work on a project himself or herself.” Judge Lenehan explained:
    • The Court must look at the role of the alleged constructor on the project, both individually and in contrast to other persons on the project and examine their level of authority and responsibility for a project or workplace in the context of the other contractors on site.
    • Under the terms of Aecon’s contract with Dalhousie to act as Construction Manager, Aecon:
      – controlled the scheduling of work on the project;
      – monitored the progress of the work;
      – directed the work of the trade contractors and reviewed the
      latter’s performance;
      – was responsible for establishing and overseeing health and
      safety on the project.
    • There is nothing in the Act which says that there can be only one constructor on a project (a point which Judge Derrick first made in McCarthy’s Roofing).
  2. Judge Lenehan’s decision confirms that where an entity is charged with an offence under the general duty of the Act and the Crown proves that the entity has not taken every precaution reasonable in the circumstances, it has negated any due diligence defence.

Offences under the Act are strict liability offences so the defendant can generally try to establish on a balance of probabilities that it exercised due diligence. However, this was not open to Aecon because exercising “due diligence” means acting without negligence or taking all reasonable care. Therefore, the fact that the Crown had already proven that Aecon had not taken every reasonable precaution regarding the disassembly, securing and storing of the swing stage meant that Aecon could not seek to defend against the charge on the basis that it had taken all reasonable care.

What does this mean for you?

The clarification from the Court should assist employers in determining and understanding their OHS responsibilities at a workplace and on a project. Also, a key takeaway is to have a clear agreement in relation to any construction project and identification of each party’s status and responsibilities.

The foregoing is intended for general information only. If you have any questions about how this may affect your business, please contact a member of our Labour & Employment group.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


Generic filters

 
 

Nova Scotia Government Introduces Public Services Sustainability (2015) Act

December 16, 2015

By Brian G. Johnston, QC On the same day that the Nova Scotia government announced its projected deficit had ballooned to $241 million, it also introduced Bill 148, the Public Services Sustainability (2015) Act (“Act”). The stated purposes…

Read More

Striking down the Nova Scotia Cyber-safety Act: The 10 most interesting things about Crouch v Snell

December 16, 2015

By Jennifer Taylor – Research Lawyer Nova Scotia’s Cyber-safety Act1 is no more, after a successful Charterchallenge to the legislation. In Crouch v Snell, 2015 NSSC 340, Justice McDougall of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia found the entire statute—enacted in…

Read More

Forsythe v Westfall: Forum of Necessity & Access to Justice

December 1, 2015

By Jennifer Taylor Introduction: Did Ontario have jurisdiction? Arguments about access to justice are not enough to oust the general principles of jurisdiction, according to a recent Ontario case. In Forsythe v Westfall, 2015 ONCA 810, the…

Read More

Client Update: Nova Scotia Court of Appeal Substantially Reduces Punitive Damages in LTD Case (Plus a Primer on the New Nova Scotia Limitations Act)

November 23, 2015

PART I: THE NSCA DECISION IN BRINE “Disability insurance is a peace of mind contract”: that’s the opening line of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal’s long-awaited decision in Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc…

Read More

Client Update: Taxation of Trusts, Estates and Charitable Donation Rules Changing January 1, 2016

November 18, 2015

The taxation of estates, testamentary trusts and certain “life interest trusts” such as alter ego, joint partner and spousal trusts, and the rules for charitable donations made on death through an estate are changing significantly…

Read More

Update on New Tax Rules for Charitable Giving

November 18, 2015

Several important changes in the tax rules that apply to charitable gifts will be coming into effect in the near future. Some of the new rules take effect in 2016, and others will apply beginning…

Read More

Atlantic Employers’ Counsel – Fall 2015

October 23, 2015

THE EDITORS’ CORNER Michelle Black and Sean Kelly Trick, Treat or … Taunt? Workplace Bullying and Harassment Fall has arrived! The leaves are changing colours, families are stockpiling Halloween candy (some of which will actually last long…

Read More

The Fair Elections Act and #elxn42: A summary of Council of Canadians v Canada (Attorney General)

October 15, 2015

By Jennifer Taylor – Research Lawyer With the federal election just days away, voting is on Canadians’ minds. This will be the first election conducted in accordance with the Fair Elections Act, SC 2014, c 12 [“FEA”] which…

Read More

In the Three Certainties We Trust: The status of Builders’ Lien Act trust claims in bankruptcy

October 9, 2015

By Jennifer Taylor Introduction There is now a Nova Scotia decision on the interplay between the provincial Builders’ Lien Act and the federal Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”) in the interesting context of trusts. In Re Kel-Greg Homes Inc, Justice Rosinski…

Read More

Proposed Changes to the Employment Standards Act (New Brunswick)

September 29, 2015

The New Brunswick government is seeking feedback from stakeholders on proposed changes to the Employment Standards Act (“Act”). The proposed changes relate to: – the statutory minimum wage; – employment protections for young workers; and – coverage…

Read More

Search Archive


Generic filters

Scroll To Top