Court of Appeal Ignores Ability to Pay; Employer Fined $750,000 for Criminal Negligence of Low Level Supervisor
The Ontario Court of Appeal imposed the largest fine to date in Canada for a criminally negligent workplace accident. In R. v. Metron Construction Corporation, the Court held that: (i) an employee need not be a “directing mind” of a corporation to attract employer liability under the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”), and (ii) a corporation’s ability to pay is not a determining factor in sentencing an offending organization. It is now clear that a criminal fine can be imposed even if it forces the offending organization into insolvency.
Background
Metron was an appeal from a decision of Justice Bigelow of the Ontario Court of Justice, who imposed a fine of $200,000 on Metron Construction Corporation after it pleaded guilty to a charge of criminal negligence causing death.
In December 2009, four Metron workers were killed and one seriously injured while restoring concrete balconies on two residential buildings in Toronto. Among those killed was the site supervisor, a contractor who did not work directly for Metron. The five victims fell 13 stories after the 40-foot swing stage they were working on collapsed. A sixth worker on the same swing stage was not injured as he was properly connected to a fall arrest system.
The Ontario Ministry of Labour and the Toronto Police identified several alarming breaches of safety regulations: (i) six workers had been on a swing stage designed for use by only two persons, (ii) insufficient lifelines were available on each swing stage, and (iii) three of the four deceased had used marijuana shortly before the accident, including the site supervisor.
In June 2012, Metron pleaded guilty to criminal charges after admitting its site supervisor demonstrated a reckless disregard for the safety of its workers in allowing these safety breaches. Justice Bigelow acknowledged that Metron had taken several proactive measures to promote safety on the project, including site inspections, employee training and regular safety meetings.
Decision
The Court of Appeal held the $200,000 fine imposed by the lower court to be manifestly unfit and increased the fine to $750,000. In doing so, the Court articulated the following principles to be considered in sentencing:
1. An organization may be held criminally liable for the actions of lower level supervisors and managers. Conduct need not be carried out by a “directing mind” of a corporation for employers to attract criminal sanction. In Metron, the site supervisor was low within the organization’s corporate hierarchy and was not even a formal employee of the company. The Court held that the site supervisor met the definitions of “representative” and “senior officer” in section 2 of the Criminal Code because the employer
delegated localized authority to him.
2. An offending organization’s ability to pay will not necessarily limit the criminal fine imposed. Rather, consideration must be given to the totality of the circumstances, including those enumerated in section 718.21 of the Criminal Code. Under subsection (d), a judge must consider the impact of a fine on the economic viability of an organization and the continued employment of its employees. Relevant factors include the importance of a corporation to a community, its value as a source of supply, and its significance as an employer. A corporation’s ability to pay a criminal fine will not be an important consideration where the organization carries on limited business and has few employees. Thus, a fine imposed under the provision could, in certain circumstances, threaten the economic viability of an offending corporation.
3. Sentences for organizations convicted of criminal negligence should not be determined by the limits in the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA). Noting that regulatory and criminal offences embody different concepts of fault, the Court stated that criminal penalties should provide additional deterrence for morally blameworthy behaviour beyond that established in the OHSA. Thus, the limits of $25,000 for individuals and $500,000 for organizations prescribed for violations of the OHSA do not apply to Criminal Code offences resulting from workplace accidents.
Key Points for Canadian Companies
Prior to Metron, little jurisprudence existed to guide the sentencing of criminal organizations in accordance with the 2004 amendments to the Criminal Code. This decision confirms the expanded scope of liability established by the Bill C-45 amendments arising from the Westray mine disaster in 1992. In light of this decision, companies doing business in Canada should have regard to the following issues and seek legal advice immediately if an employee has been involved in a workplace incident involving negligence:
- Employers may be held criminally liable for the actions of any employee or contractor with supervisory authority within the organization, no matter how minimal or in what form.
- Ability to pay is not determinative in sentencing an organization for a criminal offence.
- In appropriate cases, a fine may force an organization into liquidation.
- Organizations will face higher penalties for Criminal Code offences than for regulatory breaches.
Insights
-
Employment, Pensions and Executive Compensation
Ontario Court of Appeal Rules Employee Equity Vesting May Continue During Statutory Notice Period
In a much-anticipated decision, the Ontario Court of Appeal in Wigdor v. Facebook Canada Ltd. and Meta Platforms, Inc. found that the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (the “ESA”) requires that… -
Employment, Pensions and Executive Compensation
Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies Principles Regarding Termination Clauses
Over the past several years, Ontario courts have reached inconsistent conclusions in a number of reported cases as to whether employment contracts that permit termination of employment by the employer… -
Crisis Management and Urgent Proceedings
Panoramic Next: Crisis Management 2026 - Canada Chapter
Mark Dunn and Sarah Stothart co-authored the Canada Chapter of Panoramic Next: Crisis Management 2026. The publication explores the key factors that businesses must consider when a crisis… -
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Ontario Court of Appeal Confirms Directors Can Be Personally Liable for Civil Fraud Without Piercing the Corporate Veil
In CHU de Québec-Université Laval v. Tree of Knowledge International Corp.,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal held that direct participation in civil fraud is a standalone basis for imposing personal… -
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
International Comparative Legal Guide - Enforcement of Foreign Judgments 2026 11th Edition – Canada Chapter
Peter Kolla, Sarah Stothart and Ayesha Khanna co-authored the Canada Chapter of the International Comparative Legal Guide - Enforcement of Foreign Judgements 2026 11th Edition. The Canada Chapter… -
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
International Law and Climate Change – Federal Court Decision in Lho'Imggin v. Canada
The Federal Court’s recent decision in Lho'Imggin v. Canada adds further guidance to existing case law regarding how governments in Canada may potentially face liability for climate change…
Featured Work
-
Mergers and Acquisitions
Onex Partners and co-investors acquire AirSprint
Goodmans LLP acted as M&A legal counsel to Onex Partners in connection with the acquisition of AirSprint Inc. by Onex and its co-investors… -
REITS and Income Securities
Minto Apartment REIT completes going-private transaction with Crestpoint and Minto Group
Goodmans LLP acted for Minto Apartment Real Estate Investment Trust (the “REIT”) in connection with its going-private transaction with Crestpoint Real Estate Investments Limited Partnership… -
Mergers and Acquisitions
Jamieson Wellness to be acquired by Kirin Holdings in a deal valued at approximately C$2.5 billion
Goodmans LLP is acting for Jamieson Wellness Inc. in connection with its definitive arrangement agreement with Kirin Holdings Company, Limited, pursuant to which Kirin has agreed to acquire all of the… -
Mining
Hudbay Minerals acquires Arizona Sonoran
Goodmans LLP advised Hudbay Minerals Inc. in connection with its acquisition of Arizona Sonoran Copper Company Inc. (“ASCU”) in an all-share transaction valued at US$1.48 billion at announcement… -
Mergers and Acquisitions
Crescita acquired by ClinActiv in all-cash transaction
Goodmans LLP advised Crescita Therapeutics Inc. in connection with its acquisition by ClinActiv Holdings Inc. and its affiliate in an all-cash transaction that implied an equity value for Crescita of… -
Aging and Healthcare
Welltower acquires Amica Senior Lifestyles portfolio for $4.6 billion
Goodmans LLP advised Welltower Inc. in connection with its acquisition of a portfolio of senior housing communities from Amica Senior Lifestyles and Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan for aggregate…
News & Events
-
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Goodmans Partner Recognized in the 2026 Benchmark Litigation 40 & Under List - Canada
Goodmans is delighted to congratulate Jaclyn Tilak who has been honoured in the 11th edition of Benchmark Litigation's 40 & Under List – Canada.Jaclyn Tilak is a Partner in the Litigation and… -
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Jordan Scopa Quoted in Canadian Lawyer on Patent Litigation in Canada
Goodmans Partner Jordan Scopa shares his insights in Canadian Lawyer’s article on patent litigation in Canada.He discusses why Canada is an attractive jurisdiction for patent litigation, pointing to… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Jordan Scopa Quoted in “Biosimilars Gain Ground as Health Canada Streamlines Approval Process”, Lexpert
Goodmans Partner Jordan Scopa shares his insights in Lexpert’s article: “Biosimilars Gain Ground as Health Canada Streamlines Approval Process”.Jordan discusses the impact of Health Canada’s revised…