On Thursday, March 14, 2024, the BC provincial government tabled the Public Health Accountability and Recovery Act (the “Bill”). As presently drafted, the Bill would permit the government to bring legal action against individual and corporate ‘wrong-doers’ to recover ‘a broad range of health-related expenditures.’ The legislation as drafted is vague and seemingly wide-ranging in ambit.
In introducing the Bill, the Honourable Attorney General N. Sharma stated: “It will allow government to sue wrongdoers, regardless of if there [sic] are individuals or corporations or other entities, who either cause or contribute to the disease, illness or injury or the risk of disease, illness or injury”.
While the Bill is drafted far more broadly in scope, a press release issued from the Office of the Premier noted, “The legislation provides a way for government to go after social media companies for the harms their algorithms cause people, especially kids. If passed, the legislation will also apply to companies producing products designed to create addiction, particularly in children and young adults.” It has also been suggested that this legislation could apply to vape-manufacturers, energy drink producers and possibly even industries like gaming and oil and gas.
The Bill would allow both the provincial and federal governments to claim costs, including the costs associated with hospital treatments and doctors appointments, arising from a “health-related wrong”. It also provides for joint and several liability for a director or officer of a corporation who directs, authorizes, assents to, acquiesces in or participates in a ‘health-related wrong.’
As presently drafted, the Bill also assists the government in advancing any claims by, amongst other things, purporting to: (a) reduce the evidentiary burden of proving aggregated claims; (b) provide for retroactive effect; and (c) override the Limitation Act and provide for a 15 year limitation period.
This Bill follows similar legislation aimed at tobacco companies and opioid companies. Those acts, passed in 2000 and 2018 respectively, are notably more narrow in scope. Nonetheless, they have been the vehicles for significant and lengthy litigation and we expect that the Bill, if brought into force, will be as well.
Fasken will continue to provide updates with respect to this legislation.
