On March 11, Health Canada announced that it had assessed administrative monetary penalties under the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA) against company Orange TKO Industries (Orange TKO or the Company) of Calgary. According to Health Canada’s press release, Orange TKO failed to comply with an order of the Minister of Health to recall an all-purpose cleaner that did not meet labelling and child-resistant packaging requirements for consumer chemical products. This news is highly noteworthy as it is the first civil penalty known to us levied by Health Canada pursuant to Section 49 of the CCPSA. Although Health Canada, unlike the CPSC, does not have the statutory authority to assess civil penalties for late-reporting violations, it does have the ability to penalize companies for failing to comply with other provisions of the CCPSA, including failing to comply with the Ministry’s orders.
Under Section 31(1) of the CCPSA, Canada’s Minister of Health has the power to order a manufacturer, importer, or retailer of a consumer product to recall a product if “the Minister believes on reasonable grounds that a consumer product is a danger to human health or safety.” Likewise, Section 49 of the same statute provides that every person who contravenes an order that is made pursuant to Section 31 commits a violation and is liable to a civil penalty.
In the case of Orange TKO, on September 15, 2015, the Minister of Health ordered the Company to recall and stop sale in Canada of certain all-purpose cleaning products for failure to meet certain labelling and packaging regulations promulgated under Canada’s Hazardous Products Act. According to Health Canada’s civil penalty announcement, Orange TKO allegedly did not comply with the September 15 Order. Specifically, Orange TKO did not (1) timely provide a list of all products to Health Canada that the Company manufactured, imported, advertised and sold; (2) timely provide a list to Health Canada containing the names and addresses of the Company’s clients in Canada to whom it sold the subject product(s); and (3) timely complete and provide to Health Canada a recall notice as specified in the order. The penalty assessed against the Company was 15,000 Canadian dollars per violation—a total in this case of 75,000 Canadian dollars.
Although there are some obvious differences between this civil penalty and those frequently assessed by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission against American entities (typically, most civil penalties assessed against U.S. firms are for late-reporting violations, not failure to comply with an order of the Commission), American companies selling products in Canada should take heed. As we have written about extensively, the CPSC has increased the number of civil penalties assessed against firms in the past year or so. Perhaps Health Canada intends to follow the CPSC’s lead, under its specific regulatory framework, and do the same. We will continue to keep our readers apprised of any further developments from our neighbors to the north.
Member / Co-chair, Retail and Consumer Products
Chuck is an antitrust and regulatory lawyer who devotes a significant portion of his practice to assisting clients with consumer product safety and environmental regulations. He serves as general counsel to numerous trade associations. For the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Chuck negotiated and drafted amendments to federal laws, including the Consumer Product Safety Act. Corporations in many industries, local governments, and state agencies are also on his client roster. He represents clients before a wide array of federal agencies, including the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), state agencies, and international regulatory organizations.
Chuck is engaged in a federal and international regulatory and legislative practice. He has been extensively involved in product safety, product recall issues, environmental, tax, health care, technology, and energy issues, and public finance legislative and regulatory matters for a variety of trade associations, corporations, local governments, and state agencies.
His practice encompasses work before the US Consumer Product Safety Commission, Departments of State, Health and Human Services, Energy, and Treasury, US Trade Representative, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Trade Commission, the IRS, and other federal and state agencies. He also has extensive experience dealing with Canada, the European Commission, and international bodies.
Chuck also engages in trade association representation and antitrust counseling. As general counsel of the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Chuck negotiated and drafted the amendments to the Consumer Product Safety Act and the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, and represents the appliance industry at international bodies dealing with safety, energy, ozone depletion, and global warming.
Before joining Mintz, Chuck practiced regulatory law with a law firm in Chicago and then worked in the Executive Office of the President before entering private practice in Washington.