The appellants were charged with permitting the discharge of a contaminant that might impair water quality, contrary to the Ontario Water Resources Act, after a chlorine leak killed fish in an outfall on their property.
The trial justice acquitted them on a directed verdict, which was overturned on appeal.
At the Court of Appeal, the appellants argued the Crown was required to prove the discharge exceeded the levels permitted by their Certificate of Approval.
The Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Crown only needed to prove the actus reus of the discharge, after which the burden shifted to the appellants to demonstrate due diligence by proving compliance with the Certificate.
