The Ministry of Labour cannot reopen a Justice of the Peace’s decision to exclude evidence that a worker was injured, where the defendant company later pleaded guilty to Occupational Health and Safety Act charges and the prosecutor accepted the plea.
At trial, the Justice of the Peace decided to exclude the testimony of the worker who was apparently injured in a workplace accident. The company then decided to plead guilty to one charge and the prosecutor withdrew the other charge against the company and a separate charge against a contractor to the company.
The parties then argued about the fine, and the Justice of the Peace again excluded the evidence of the apparently injured worker when setting the fine. Presumably the court imposed a fine that was lower due to the lack of any evidence about worker injuries.
The Ministry of Labour thought the fine was too low. It appealed the decision on the fine, and sought on the appeal to reargue the Justice of the Peace’s decision to exclude the worker’s testimony in considering how much the fine should be.
The appeal judge decided that, having “actively participated” in the guilty plea which ended the trial, the MOL was bound by the Justice of the Peace’s decision to exclude the worker’s evidence about his injury and could not reopen that issue on appeal. The appeal judge recognized that the result of his ruling on that issue may well end the appeal, because evidence about the worker’s injury would not be considered in arguments about the amount of the fine.
Ontario (Ministry of Labour) v. Ontario Power Generation, 2016 ONCJ 299 (CanLII)
