In what circumstances will the absurdity principle be interpreted to avoid absurd results?

In Ontario v. Canadian Pacific Limited 1995 CanLII 112 (SCC), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1031, 1995 S.C.J. No.62 Mr. Justice Gonthier, as he then was, stated at paragraph 65: A statute should be interpreted to avoid absurd results....in particular because the legislation is presumed not to have intended to attach penal consequences to trivial or minimal violations of a provision, the absurdity principle allows for the narrowing of the scope of the provision. In this respect, the absurdity principle is closely related to the maxim, de minimus non curat lex (the law does not concern itself with trifle.