Advocate Jan 2014
Advocate Jan 2014
Advocate Jan 2014
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
THE ADVOCATE VOL. 72 PART 1 JANUARY <strong>2014</strong><br />
153<br />
The Honourable Madam Justice Catherine Ryan retired from the Court of<br />
Appeal effective September 15, 2013. Madam Justice Ryan articled at<br />
Boughtons and spent her entire career with the Ministry of the Attorney<br />
General, in the later stages of which she practised almost exclusively before<br />
the Court of Appeal. She was appointed to the County Court in 1987 and<br />
became a Supreme Court Judge with the merger of the two courts.<br />
The Honourable Madam Justice Jo-Ann Prowse retired from the Court of<br />
Appeal effective August 31, 2013. Madam Justice Prowse articled at Russell<br />
and DuMoulin and worked for six months as an associate with that old firm.<br />
Then she, Hamar Foster and Donald Williamson formed a firm with an<br />
office in Maple Tree Square, in Gastown. She was appointed to the County<br />
Court of Vancouver in December 1986.<br />
In 2012 British Petroleum (“BP”) pleaded guilty to 14 criminal charges,<br />
including manslaughter and admitted negligence in misreading important<br />
tests prior to the explosion on its oil rig in the Caribbean, which killed 11<br />
workers and spilled countless barrels of oil into the sea in 2010. BP has<br />
already paid $4.5 billion in fines and other penalties and over $42 billion in<br />
cleanup costs and compensation for victims. Now BP is facing the second<br />
phase of a civil trial in U.S. Federal Court in New Orleans. The plaintiff is<br />
the U.S. federal government. The first phase of the trial, which took place<br />
over two months earlier this year, centred on the issue of whether BP was<br />
guilty of negligence (already admitted) or gross negligence. Judge Carl J.<br />
Barbier has not yet ruled on this issue.<br />
If the judge rules in favour of the American government’s position that<br />
there was gross negligence and that 4.2 million barrels were spilled, then<br />
the fines could amount to as much as $18 billion. The negligence, gross or<br />
otherwise, consists not only in facilitating the explosion in the first place,<br />
but also in not stemming the flow more quickly.<br />
BP contends that it was guilty of mere negligence and that only 2.45 million<br />
barrels were discharged into the sea. Those who know about these things<br />
maintain that if the worst happens, BP could come close to bankruptcy.<br />
Now, the gnomes who compile “Bench and Bar” were puzzled that a civil<br />
action by the federal government against BP could result in fines. Gnomic<br />
inquiries turned up the fact that some of the claims are being made pursuant<br />
to the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq. (1972), which provides for civil<br />
fines: a minimum of $1 for every barrel spilled through simple negligence to<br />
$5,300 per barrel if there is a finding of gross negligence. Experts will be<br />
called to testify about the amount spilled. The trial is expected to become a