Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

CROWN

Torts

A. O. Farms Inc. v. Canada

T-1620-95

Hugessen J.

27/10/00

6 pp.

Plaintiff entered into contracts for sale of barley to American customers during month when Continental Barley Market Policy in force--Policy and relevant regulations revoked by newly elected government--Managed to fulfill contracts with difficulty and at greater cost to itself--Hence claim for damages against Crown--Plaintiff alleging government negligent in carrying out legislative changes, negligent misrepresentation--Motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's action--Motion allowed--No action can lie against government for adopting legislation subsequently found ultra vires--Principle applicable to decision to legislate as well as decision how to legislate (here, amending regulations)--As to negligent misrepresentation, first test whether reasonable for plaintiff to rely on representation made--Very few people would consider reasonable to rely on promises made by politicians in pre-election period--Representations statement made as to past or present fact--Promise, in contrast, undertaking as to future action--Absent fraud or bad faith, promise does not constitute basis of action in negligence--As pleaded statements here all as to future conduct, cannot be tortious--Obiter: More modern approach to claim in negligence against public authorities: Anns/Kamloops test (Anns v. Merton London Borough Council, [1978] A.C. 728 (H.L.); Kamloops (City of) v. Nielsen et al., [1984] 2 S.C.R. 2)--(1) Whether relationship of proximity between plaintiff and authority such as to give rise to duty of care--Here relationship between government and governed not one of individual proximity--Duty owed to public collectively, not individually--(2) Whether statute or policy considerations mitigate, colour or negate duty--Public authority must be free to make choices with eye only to political consequences, not to possibility of being sued for damages--Government, when legislating, even wrongly, incompetently, stupidly, or misguidedly, not liable in damages.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.