Case information

Civil procedure — Contempt of court — Required intent — Directing minds — Corporate defendants — Whether the directing minds doctrine applies to corporate defendants in the context of civil contempt as a factor that speaks to whether intent is established — Whether an alleged corporate contemnor’s significant efforts to comply operate as a defence that negates a prima facie finding of contempt, despite all elements being made out (or rather, do they speak to a court’s discretionary powers to decline to find contempt?).

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The applicant, Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, alleged that the respondent, Canadian Pacific Railway Company (“CP”) was in civil contempt of court for failing to comply with a labour arbitration award which had been registered with the Federal Court. The Federal Court agreed and found CP in contempt for some, but not all, of the asserted violations.

The Federal Court of Appeal unanimously allowed CP’s appeal, set aside the conviction for contempt and entered an acquittal. In its view, the Federal Court misdirected itself as to the law of civil contempt. The Federal Court erred in finding contempt in absence of intent, effectively treating contempt as a strict or absolute liability offence. The court also erred in abandoning the directing minds principle and in excluding due diligence or reasonable efforts defences from the contempt analysis.