The Queen (Can.) v. Saskatchewan Wheat Pool

[1983] 1 SCR 205 Court SCC Decision date 1983-02-08 Docket 16352 English

PartiesHer Majesty The Queen in right of Canada Appellant·Saskatchewan Wheat Pool Respondent

Counsel (4)

Henry B. Monk, Q.C., E. I. MacDonald, Q.C., and Deedar Sagoo, for the appellant.
E. J. Moss, Q.C., and Barbara Shourounis, for the respondent.
Solicitor for the appellant: Henry B. Monk, Winnipeg.
Solicitors for the respondent: Balfour, Moss, Milliken, Laschuk, Kyle, Vancise & Cameron, Regina.

Judges Ritchie, Roland Almon; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; Estey, Willard Zebedee; McIntyre, William Rogers; Chouinard, Julien; Lamer, Antonio

Delivered by Judgment of the Court

On appeal from Federal Court of Appeal

Subjects Torts

Contents

Judgment of the Court

The judgment of the Court was delivered by

Civil consequences of breach of statute should be subsumed in the law of negligence.

The notion of a nominate tort of statutory breach giving a right to recovery merely on proof of breach and damages should be rejected, as should the view that unexcused breach constitutes negligence per se giving rise to absolute liability.

Proof of statutory breach, causative of damages, may be evidence of negligence.

[Page 228]

The statutory formulation of the duty may afford a specific, and useful, standard of reasonable conduct.

In the case at bar negligence is neither pleaded nor proven. The action must fail.