Waste management facilities, if not properly managed and controlled, can create a significant environmental risk.  The recent ruling of the BC Provincial Court in R. v. Fraser Valley Disposal and Liang, 2015 BCPC 0127 confirms that if an operator of a waste management facility violates applicable bylaws and licenses, fines should be sufficiently significant to deter such conduct. 

Fraser Valley Disposal operated a solid waste transfer station in Surrey,  pursuant to a license issued by the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District ("Metro Vancouver").  Mr. and Mrs. Liang acquired the business in 2010.  Mr. Liang ran day-to-day operations and Mrs. Liang was the sole director.  In 2011, the marriage started to fall apart and, eventually Mr. and Mrs. Liang divorced. In 2012, Mrs. Liang sold the company.

In 2013, Metro Vancouver charged Fraser Valley Disposal and Mrs. and Mrs. Liang with violating the GVSDD Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Regulatory Bylaw No. 181 and the applicable license.  Metro Vancouver alleged that, on a number of occasions, the company accepted unauthorized materials (including asbestos) and accepted waste in excess of allowable quantity. 

Fraser Valley Disposal and Mrs. Liang pled guilty.  Mr. Liang's whereabouts were unknown and he did not appear at the hearing.  Metro Vancouver sought fines against the company of $72,000 and fines against Mrs. Liang of $2,100.  The company and Mrs. Liang challenged the amount of fines.  Among other things, they emphasized personal circumstances, Mr. Liang's involvement, new owners' attempts to ensure compliance and the like.

The Provincial Court set out the applicable sentencing considerations as follows:

"[27] Courts in this province have identified relevant considerations to be the criminality of the conduct, its extent and timeframe; the extent of unsuccessful enforcement efforts before proceedings; efforts to comply by the offender with the legislation and licences; the extent of environmental damage, if any; remorse, including pleas of guilty and the presence of corporate officers in court as acknowledgment of that offending conduct; profits realized through the violations in issue and past offending history.

In the Court's view, fines "must not be just a cost to be absorbed in the headlong pursuit of greater profit, but acts as an effective deterrent to this operator and to others in the business."

In case of Fraser Valley Disposal, the Court found the conduct egregious enough to warrant substantial fines.  Taking into account the fact that the company was fairly small, there was no environmental damage, and Mrs. Liang was in financial difficulties, the Court ordered that the appropriate fines were $58,500 for the company and $1,500 for Mrs. Liang.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.