1 total
Judicial review allowed; workplace danger requires objective proof, not mere possibility or subjective expectation.
Three flight attendants refused to work following "fume events" on flights, citing unpleasant odours that suggested potential exposure to toxic pyrolyzed jet oil.
An Occupational Health and Safety Appeals Officer originally found no objective "danger" under the Canada Labour Code due to insufficient evidence of harmful contaminant levels.
After a previous judicial review remitted the matter, the Officer issued a new decision finding that despite insufficient objective evidence of a hazard, the preventive purpose of the Code and the potential for illness justified a finding of danger and the work refusals.
The employer sought judicial review.
The Federal Court held the decision was unreasonable because binding jurisprudence establishes that a finding of danger must be based on objective evidence establishing it is more likely than not that a hazard will cause injury, not mere speculation or possibility.
The application was allowed and the matter remitted.
