Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2018

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Contingencies

In the normal course of its operations, the Company becomes involved in various legal actions, including claims relating to injuries and damage to property. The Company maintains provisions it considers to be adequate for such actions. While the final outcome with respect to actions outstanding or pending at June 30, 2018 cannot be predicted with certainty, it is the opinion of management that their resolution will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

Legal proceedings related to Lac-Mégantic rail accident

On July 6, 2013, a train carrying petroleum crude oil operated by Montreal Maine and Atlantic Railway (“MMAR”) or a subsidiary, Montreal Maine & Atlantic Canada Co. (“MMAC” and collectively the “MMA Group”), derailed in Lac-Mégantic, Québec. The derailment occurred on a section of railway owned and operated by the MMA Group. The previous day CP had interchanged the train to the MMA Group, and after the interchange, the MMA Group exclusively controlled the train.

In the wake of the derailment, MMAC sought court protection in Canada under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36 and MMAR filed for bankruptcy in the United States. Plans of arrangement have been approved in both Canada and the U.S. (the “Plans”). These Plans provide for the distribution of a fund of approximately $440 million amongst those claiming derailment damages.

A number of legal proceedings, set out below, were commenced after the derailment in Canada and/or in the U.S. against CP and others:

(1) Québec's Minister of Sustainable Development, Environment, Wildlife and Parks (the "Minister") ordered various parties, including CP, to clean up the derailment site (the “Cleanup Order”). CP appealed the Cleanup Order to the Administrative Tribunal of Québec (the “TAQ”). The Minister subsequently served a Notice of Claim seeking $95 million for compensation spent on cleanup. CP filed a contestation of the Notice of Claim with the TAQ (the “TAQ Proceeding”). CP and the Minister agreed to stay the TAQ Proceedings pending the outcome of the Province of Québec's action, described in item #2 below.

(2) Québec’s Attorney General sued CP in the Québec Superior Court initially claiming $409 million in damages, which claim was amended and reduced to $315 million (the “Province’s Action”). The Province’s Action alleges that CP exercised custody or control over the petroleum crude oil until its delivery to Irving Oil, that CP was negligent in its custody and control of the petroleum crude oil and that therefore CP is jointly and severally liable with third parties responsible for the derailment and vicariously liable for the acts and omissions of MMAC.

(3) A class action in the Québec Superior Court on behalf of persons and entities residing in, owning or leasing property in, operating a business in or physically present in Lac-Mégantic at the time of the derailment (the “Class Action”) was certified against CP, MMAC and the train conductor, Mr. Thomas Harding ("Harding"). The Class Action seeks unquantified damages, including for wrongful death, personal injury, and property damage arising from the derailment. All known wrongful death claimants in the Class Action have opted out and, by court order, cannot re-join the Class Action.

(4) Eight subrogated insurers sued CP in the Québec Superior Court initially claiming approximately $16 million in damages, which claim was amended and reduced to $14 million (the “Promutuel Action”) and two additional subrogated insurers sued CP in the Québec Superior Court claiming approximately $3 million in damages (the “Royal Action”). Both Actions contain essentially the same allegations as the Province’s Action. The lawsuits do not identify the parties to which the insurers are subrogated, and therefore the extent to which these claims overlap with the proof of claims process under the Plans is difficult to determine at this stage. The Royal Action has been stayed pending the determination of the consolidated proceedings described below.

The Province’s Action, the Class Action and the Promutuel Action have been consolidated and will proceed together through the litigation process in the Québec Superior Court. While each Action will remain a separate legal proceeding, there will be a trial to determine liability issues commencing mid-September 2019, and subsequently, if necessary, a trial to determine damages issues.

(5) Forty-eight plaintiffs (all individual claims joined in one action) sued CP, MMAC and Harding in the Québec Superior Court claiming approximately $5 million in damages for economic loss and pain and suffering. These plaintiffs assert essentially the same allegations as those contained in the Class Action and the Province’s Action against CP. The plaintiffs assert they have opted-out of the Class Action. All but two of the plaintiffs were plaintiffs in litigation against CP, described in paragraph 7 below, that originated in the U.S. who either withdrew their claims or had their case dismissed in the U.S.

(6) An adversary proceeding filed by the MMAR U.S. estate representative (“Estate Representative”) in Maine accuses CP of failing to abide by certain regulations (the “Adversary Proceeding”). The Estate Representative alleges that CP should not have moved the petroleum crude oil train because an inaccurate classification by the shipper was or should have been known. The Estate Representative seeks damages for MMAR’s business value (as yet unquantified) allegedly destroyed by the derailment.

(7) A class action and mass tort action on behalf of Lac-Mégantic residents and wrongful death representatives commenced in Texas and wrongful death and personal injury actions commenced in Illinois and Maine against CP were all removed to and consolidated in Maine (the “Maine Actions”). The Maine Actions allege that CP negligently misclassified and mis-packaged the petroleum crude oil being shipped. On CP’s motion, the Maine Actions were dismissed by the Court on several grounds. The plaintiffs are appealing the dismissal decision.

(8) The Trustee (the “WD Trustee”) for the wrongful death trust (the “WD Trust”), as defined and established by the Estate Representative under the Plans, asserts Carmack Amendment claims against CP in North Dakota federal court (the “Carmack Claims”). The WD Trustee seeks to recover approximately $6 million for damaged rail cars, and the settlement amounts the consignor and the consignee paid to the bankruptcy estates, alleged to be $110 million and $60 million, respectively. On CP’s motion, the federal court in North Dakota dismissed the Carmack Claims. The WD Trustee appealed the dismissal decision. The court in the appeal has reserved judgment.

At this stage of the proceedings, the risk of a finding of liability and the quantum of potential losses cannot be determined. CP denies liability and is vigorously defending the above noted proceedings.

Environmental liabilities

Environmental remediation accruals, recorded on an undiscounted basis unless a reliable, determinable estimate as to an amount and timing of costs can be established, cover site-specific remediation programs.

The accruals for environmental remediation represent CP’s best estimate of its probable future obligation and include both asserted and unasserted claims, without reduction for anticipated recoveries from third parties. Although the recorded accruals include CP’s best estimate of all probable costs, CP’s total environmental remediation costs cannot be predicted with certainty. Accruals for environmental remediation may change from time to time as new information about previously untested sites becomes known, and as environmental laws and regulations evolve and advances are made in environmental remediation technology. The accruals may also vary as the courts decide legal proceedings against outside parties responsible for contamination. These potential charges, which cannot be quantified at this time, may materially affect income in the particular period in which a charge is recognized.

Costs related to existing, but as yet unknown, or future contamination will be accrued in the period in which they become probable and reasonably estimable.

The expense included in “Purchased services and other” for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018 was $1 million and $2 million, respectively (three and six months ended June 30, 2017 - $1 million and $2 million). Provisions for environmental remediation costs are recorded in “Other long-term liabilities”, except for the current portion which is recorded in “Accounts payable and accrued liabilities”. The total amount provided at June 30, 2018 was $81 million (December 31, 2017 - $78 million). Payments are expected to be made over 10 years through 2028.