June 24, 2009 - Order re: 4th Amended Statement of Claim - Wagners

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(b) CNR dumped them onto its lands adjacent to the Sydney Tar Ponds from where they migrated through the air, water and soil to the Sydney Tar Ponds and to the Neighbourhoods. 91. 79. The CNR Contaminants have spread into the Neighbourhoods through the air, water and soil. They continue to migrate onto the property of the Plaintiffs and Class Members. The Plaintiffs and Class Members continue to inhale, ingest, and to have dermal contact with them. (iv) (iii) Conclusion on Strict Liability and Nuisance 92. 80. Each of the Defendants is accordingly strictly liable given that it, in pursuit of its own interests, released, directed the release of, or acquiesced in the release of Contaminants creating an abnormally dangerous and pervasive risk to the health and welfare of the Plaintiffs and Class Members. The risk created by all of the Defendants has materialized resulting in direct and consequential damages to the property and health of the Plaintiffs and Class Members. 93. 81. Further, the past and ongoing release of Contaminants by all of the Defendants from lands they own and/or occupy or from lands which they owned and/or occupied in the past has substantially and unreasonably interfered with the Plaintiffs' and Class Members' use and enjoyment of their lands and premises. In addition to causing extensive property damage, exposure to the Contaminants has created widespread adverse health consequences and risks to the Plaintiffs and other Class Members. Accordingly, the Defendants are liable in nuisance. (C) Trespass 94. 82. All of the Defendants are liable in trespass in that each of them has discharged Contaminants, without the Plaintiffs' and Class Members' consent, onto lands owned by the Plaintiffs and Class Members as further particularized below. (i) Steel Works Defendants 95. 83. Between 1928 and 1967, Ispat emitted the Operational Emissions and Tar Ponds Contaminants from the Steel Works. These emissions were deposited on the lands in the Neighbourhoods owned and/or occupied by the Plaintiffs and Class 30
Members through the air in the form of vapour, particulate matter and dust, and through the earth and water migrating from the Coke Ovens Lands and the Sydney Tar Ponds. 96. 84. From 1967 until 2000, SYSCO and Nova Scotia emitted Operational Emissions and Tar Ponds Contaminants from the Steel Works (except for 1968-1974 when Canada operated the Coke Ovens, and 1988-2000 when the Coke Ovens ceased to operate, during which periods Nova Scotia operated only the Steel Plant). These emissions were deposited on the lands in the Neighbourhoods owned and/or occupied by the Plaintiffs and Class Members through the air in the form of vapour, particulate matter and dust, and through the earth and water migrating from the Coke Ovens Lands and the Sydney Tar Ponds. 97. 85. From 1968-1974, Canada emitted Operational Emissions and Tar Ponds Contaminants from the Coke Ovens. These emissions were deposited on the lands in the Neighbourhoods owned and/or occupied by the Plaintiffs and Class Members through the air in the form of vapour, particulate matter and dust, and through the earth and water migrating from the Coke Ovens Lands and the Sydney Tar Ponds. (ii) Domtar 98. Until 1962, Domtar emitted the Domtar Contaminants from the By Products Operations. After Domtar abandoned the By Products Operations in 1962, the Domtar Contaminants continued to escape from the By Products Operations as a result of Domtar's, Ispat's (1962 1967), SYSCO's and Nova Scotia's (1967 present) failure to remove the Contaminants remaining at the By Products Operations. (iii) (ii) CNR 99. 86. Until 1994, CNR emitted the CNR Contaminants from its operations adjacent to the Sydney Tar Ponds. The CNR Contaminants were deposited on the lands in the Neighbourhoods owned and/or occupied by the Plaintiffs and Class Members through the air in the form of vapour, and through the earth and water migrating from the land occupied by CNR and the Sydney Tar Ponds. 31
Page 5 and 6: Form 4.03B SCHEDULE “A” 2004 Hf
Page 7 and 8: (k) (i) CNR Operations means the ra
Page 9 and 10: (iii) Have lived within the Class B
Page 11 and 12: III. DEFENDANTS (A) Steel Works Def
Page 13 and 14: occupier of the lands in question,
Page 15 and 16: ethybenzene, xylene, phenols and he
Page 17 and 18: year horizon for the effective reme
Page 19 and 20: 42. 34. In 1982, the Defendant Cana
Page 21 and 22: Members did not know and were preve
Page 23 and 24: FEDERAL STATUTE CITATION RELEVANT S
Page 25 and 26: PROVINCIAL STATUTE CITATION RELEVAN
Page 27 and 28: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons an
Page 29 and 30: market value of 192 Laurier Street
Page 31 and 32: Ponds Contaminants, with full knowl
Page 33: Plaintiffs and Class Members. They
Page 37 and 38: (a) (b) (c) The Operational Emissio
Page 39 and 40: (f) (g) (h) Used raw materials, inc
Page 41 and 42: (ii) CNR 116. 101.The Defendant CNR
Page 43 and 44: exercise a sufficient standard of c
Page 45 and 46: Operations (in the case of Domtar)
Page 47 and 48: 133. 109.The Plaintiffs state that
Page 49 and 50: (C) Family Losses: 145. 121.As well
Page 51 and 52: (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j)(i) (k)(j) (

June 24, 2009 - Order re: 4th Amended Statement of Claim - Wagners

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?