R. v Vadim Kazenelson

2015 ONSC 3639 (CanLII)Decided Workplace injury and workers' compensation

Summary

This is a criminal prosecution of a supervisor for workplace health and safety violations resulting in worker deaths and injuries. The court addressed whether the accused breached legal duties under s. 217.1 of the Criminal Code and the Occupational Health and Safety Act by failing to ensure proper fall arrest systems, and whether criminal negligence under s. 219 was established. The court found that the accused's omissions constituted a marked and substantial departure from reasonable conduct and were a significant contributing cause to the harm, with intervening acts insufficient to sever causation.

Outcome

Breach of duty and criminal negligence established

Key Factors

  • Workplace health and safety
  • Criminal negligence
  • Supervisor’s responsibility
  • Causation
  • Occupational Health and Safety Act

Related Cases

Ontario (Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development) v. Greater Sudbury (City)

2026 ONSC 3671 (CanLII) · 2026-07-10

OHSA Appeal: Due Diligence and Standard of Review

An appeal of convictions under the Occupational Health and Safety Act against the City of Sudbury for alleged failures to ensure workplace safety. The court addressed the standard of review for OHSA prosecutions, finding that questions of law are reviewed on a correctness standard while mixed questions of fact and law are reviewed for palpable and overriding error. The appeal was allowed and acquittals entered because the trial judge's findings were unsupported by evidence and based on speculation.

Stobo v. Queen’s University

2026 ONSC 2253 (CanLII) · 2026-04-22

Workplace Investigation Independence: OHS Act Injunction Refused

This is an interlocutory proceeding concerning an application for interim relief and a mandatory order related to an investigation under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The court applied the RJR-MacDonald test to determine whether to grant an injunction or mandatory order to compel or restrain an investigation, ultimately refusing relief as the balance of convenience favored the statutory duty to investigate and irreparable harm was speculative.

Douglas v. Babiar

2025 ONSC 7075 (CanLII) · 2025-12-19

Police Officer Tort Claim vs Discipline Proceedings

This is a procedural ruling on a motion to strike where the plaintiff, a police officer, sought to pursue tort claims linked to internal police discipline proceedings. The court determined it had residual jurisdiction because the dispute had moved beyond the collective agreement into the criminal justice system, and rejected arguments that statutory privilege barred the civil claims.

Toombs et al. v. Worksafe BC et al.

2025 ONSC 1988 (CanLII) · 2025-04-02

Class Action Costs: Workers' Compensation Dispute

This is a procedural ruling concerning costs and class action representation in a class action against provincial workers' compensation boards. The court addressed motions for funding legal costs, appointing amicus curiae, and compliance with class action rules, ultimately awarding costs to the successful defendants.

R. v. Greater Sudbury (City)

2024 ONSC 3959 (CanLII) · 2024-08-23

An appeal concerning a provincial offence prosecution under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, focusing on the burden of proof and the standard of reasonableness required for compliance.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Ontario Severance is an educational tool. If you are facing a serious employment law matter, consult with a qualified employment lawyer in Ontario.