Law360 Canada ( May 18, 2018, 2:13 PM EDT) -- Appeal by West Fraser Mills Ltd. (West Fraser) from the judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal affirming the decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court which dismissed an application for judicial review of a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (Tribunal). A tree faller was fatally struck by a rotting tree while working within the area of a forest license held by West Fraser. The faller was employed, not by West Fraser, but by an independent contractor. The Workers’ Compensation Board of British Columbia (Board) concluded that West Fraser had violated s. 26.2(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation (Regulation), which it had adopted in response to a concern in the province about the growing rate of workplace fatalities in the forestry sector. Consequently, the Board imposed on West Fraser an administrative penalty pursuant to s. 196(1) of the Workers Compensation Act (Act). West Fraser argued that s. 26.2(1) of the Regulation was ultra vires and that an administrative penalty under s. 196(1) of the Act could only be levied against an entity acting as an “employer”, and not against an “owner”. The Tribunal dismissed West Fraser’s appeal. Both the British Columbia Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal upheld the Tribunal’s order. The question before the Court was whether s. 26.2(1) of the Regulation represented a reasonable exercise of the Board’s delegated regulatory authority and whether the Tribunal’s interpretation of s. 196(1) to enable a penalty against West Fraser was patently unreasonable....