Regulatory offence

A regulatory offence, often called a quasi-criminal offence, is a breach of a statute that protects public welfare, such as workplace safety, environmental or licensing laws. In British Columbia, most are strict liability offences: the Crown need not prove intent, but the accused avoids conviction by proving it took all reasonable care, called due diligence.

How BC law treats it

Provincial regulatory offences in BC are prosecuted under the Offence Act, RSBC 1996, c 338, which supplies the procedure and default penalties where the regulating statute is silent. Many minor offences are enforced by violation ticket. Federal regulatory offences, such as those under federal environmental, food or transport statutes, are prosecuted using federal procedure. Drug offences are federal matters, not provincial regulatory offences. The Supreme Court of Canada set out three categories in R v Sault Ste Marie, [1978] 2 SCR 1299. True criminal offences require proof of a guilty mind. Strict liability offences, the default for public welfare statutes, require only proof of the prohibited act, after which the accused must prove due diligence on a balance of probabilities. Absolute liability offences allow no due diligence defence, and cannot carry imprisonment (Re BC Motor Vehicle Act, [1985] 2 SCR 486). The reverse onus for due diligence was upheld in R v Wholesale Travel Group Inc, [1991] 3 SCR 154. Penalties can be substantial. Statutes such as the Workers Compensation Act, RSBC 2019, c 1 and the Environmental Management Act, SBC 2003, c 53 provide for large fines and, for some offences, imprisonment. Many regulatory statutes also make directors and officers personally liable if they authorize, permit or acquiesce in the company's offence. Professional discipline, such as that of real estate licensees by the BC Financial Services Authority, is a separate administrative process, not a prosecution.

What it means for your business

Regulatory offences are the criminal law most businesses actually meet. A single workplace injury, spill or licensing lapse can lead to charges against the company and, in some cases, its directors personally. The best defence is built before anything goes wrong: written safety and compliance policies, training records, inspections and documented responses to warnings. Those records are what prove due diligence. A conviction can also affect permits, insurance and the ability to bid on public contracts. Example: A Kelowna construction company is charged after a worker falls from scaffolding. It defends the charge by producing its fall protection policy, training logs and daily inspection checklists to show it took all reasonable care.

Risks and common mistakes

Assuming that because the company did not intend harm, it cannot be convicted of a strict liability offence. Keeping safety and compliance procedures informally, leaving no documents to prove due diligence when charges are laid. Paying a ticket or pleading guilty without considering how a conviction affects permits, insurance or future penalties. Believing directors are shielded by the corporation when the statute imposes personal liability for authorizing or acquiescing in the offence. Treating a regulator's investigation or inspection as routine and giving statements without advice.

Key authorities

Offence Act, RSBC 1996, c 338
R v Sault Ste Marie, [1978] 2 SCR 1299
R v Wholesale Travel Group Inc, [1991] 3 SCR 154
Re BC Motor Vehicle Act, [1985] 2 SCR 486
Workers Compensation Act, RSBC 2019, c 1
Environmental Management Act, SBC 2003, c 53

Frequently asked questions

What is the due diligence defence in BC?

For strict liability offences, the accused can avoid conviction by proving, on a balance of probabilities, that it took all reasonable care to prevent the offence, or reasonably believed in facts that would have made the act innocent. Documented policies, training and inspections are the usual evidence.

Can directors be personally charged for a company's regulatory offence?

Yes, under many statutes. Environmental, workplace safety and similar laws often make directors and officers liable if they authorized, permitted or acquiesced in the offence. Directors should ask for regular compliance reporting and act on warnings to protect themselves.

Is a regulatory offence a criminal record?

A provincial regulatory conviction is not a Criminal Code conviction, but it is a public record of a breach of law. It can raise future penalties, affect licences and permits, and be relevant to insurers, lenders and public procurement decisions.

Facing a regulatory charge or investigation? Talk to a Fulcrum litigation lawyer.