R. v. Bird Construction Group

R. v. Bird Construction Group

Court found Crown proved the subcontractor removed waste outside HRM but did not prove Bird or Silverbirch 'permitted' the breach; contractual obligations plus active, regular monitoring (on-site superintendent, LEED logs, invoices) established a reasonable system of supervision; therefore defendants proved due diligence and are not guilty under s.369(1).

Citation
2014 NSPC 33
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Bird Construction Group; Defendant: Silverbirch No. 15 Holdings
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Regulatory Offence Under Municipal by Law / Trial Decision (guilt Phase)
Outcome
Silverbirch No. 15 Holdings and Bird Construction Group found not guilty of contravening HRM By-law S-600 s.16.3 pursuant to Halifax Regional Municipality Charter s.369(1); Verhagen Demolition Limited had pleaded guilty earlier.
Legal Topics
Strict Liability, Due Diligence Defence, Permit Liability, Contractual Supervision, Waste Management by Law Compliance
Source Language
English
Municipal Law Environmental Regulation Administrative Law Construction Law Criminal Procedure Strict Liability Due Diligence Defence Permit Liability +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Bird Construction Group

Defendant

Silverbirch No. 15 Holdings

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Regulatory Offence Under Municipal by Law / Trial Decision (guilt Phase)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants failed to do anything required by the by-law (s.369(1)(b))
  2. 2 Whether defendants permitted a subcontractor to violate HRM By-law S-600 (s.369(1)(c))
  3. 3 Whether defendants established the due diligence defence for a strict liability offence

Ratio Decidendi

Court found Crown proved the subcontractor removed waste outside HRM but did not prove Bird or Silverbirch 'permitted' the breach; contractual obligations plus active, regular monitoring (on-site superintendent, LEED logs, invoices) established a reasonable system of supervision; therefore defendants proved due diligence and are not guilty under s.369(1).

Court Disposition

Silverbirch No. 15 Holdings and Bird Construction Group found not guilty of contravening HRM By-law S-600 s.16.3 pursuant to Halifax Regional Municipality Charter s.369(1); Verhagen Demolition Limited had pleaded guilty earlier.

Orders

  • Silverbirch No. 15 Holdings: found not guilty of the charge
  • Bird Construction Group: found not guilty of the charge