Casual Legal: Remedies for Contempt of Court
By Daina Young
Reynolds Mirth Richards Farmer LLP
Alberta Municipalities Casual Legal Service Provider
The Ontario Court of Appeal recently considered the law of civil contempt as it relates to breach of a court order requiring compliance with a municipal bylaw. This decision may be of interest to members of Alberta Municipalities, who find themselves in the position of applying to the Court of King’s Bench for an order under s. 554 of the Municipal Government Act requiring a person to comply with a municipal bylaw, or an Order to Remedy or Stop Order issued under the Act.
Civil contempt is a remedy that can be granted by the Court when a person is in breach of the requirements of a court order. In order for a person to be found in contempt of a court order:
(1) the order must state clearly and unequivocally what should be done (or not done);
(2) the person must have had actual notice of the order, and;
(3) the person must intentionally, and without reasonable excuse, breach the order.
In determining the appropriate remedy for contempt of court, judges will consider principles such as coercion, punishment and the public interest. The nature of the remedy can vary in terms of its severity. The Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision involved a number of individuals and a corporation (the “Appellants”) who were storing hundreds of vehicles on a property in contravention of a municipal bylaw. The municipality applied to the court for an order directing a number of things, including that the Appellants stop the unauthorized use of the property for outdoor vehicle storage. The municipality subsequently applied to have the Appellants found in contempt of the court order, based on continued non-compliance which the court characterized as “flagrant, protracted, deliberate and profitable”. The court found the Appellants in contempt of the court order, and imposed a fine in the amount of $1M.
The Appellants appealed the imposition of the fine to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal noted the fine at issue was higher than is imposed in the vast majority of cases, but was not unprincipled or without precedent. The Court of Appeal confirmed the economic circumstances of the person in breach of the court order and the impact of any potential fine in terms of encouraging compliance are relevant considerations in determining the remedy for civil contempt. In the specific circumstances of the case, the Court of Appeal upheld the lower court’s decision.
It is important for municipalities to understand that the remedy for breach of a court order will not generally be a substantial monetary fine. It is more typical for the remedy, especially at early stages, to be less severe; for example, a declaration the person is in contempt of the court order. However, the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision highlights that monetary fines may be appropriate where non-compliance is continued and egregious and that financial circumstances – including the extent to which a person is profiting from continuing breach of a court order - may be relevant to determine the appropriate remedy.
To access Alberta Municipalities Casual Legal Helpline, Alberta Municipalities members can call toll-free to 1-800-661-7673 or email casuallegal [at] abmunis.ca and reach the municipal legal experts at Reynolds Mirth Richards and Farmer LLP. For more information on the Casual Legal Service, please contact riskcontrol [at] abmunis.ca, or call 310-MUNI (6864) to speak to Alberta Municipalities Risk Management staff. Any Regular or Associate member of Alberta Municipalities can access the Casual Legal Service.
DISCLAIMER: This article is meant to provide information only and is not intended to provide legal advice. You should seek the advice of legal counsel to address your specific set of circumstances. Although every effort has been made to provide current and accurate information, changes to the law may cause the information in this article to be outdated.
