Is there a cause of action for negligent breach of statutory duty?

To the extent that the plaintiffs allege breach of statutory duty, without more (as in paras. 12, 17(c), and 17(i) of the amended statement of claim), that is not a cause of action. As stated by McLachlin C.J.C. in Holland v. Saskatchewan, 2008 SCC 42 at para. 9: The law to date has not recognized an action for negligent breach of statutory duty. It is well established that mere breach of a statutory duty does not constitute negligence: The Queen in right of Canada v. Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, 1983 CanLII 21 (SCC), [1983] 1 S.C.R. 205. The proper remedy for breach of statutory duty by a public authority, traditionally viewed, is judicial review for invalidity. The appellant pursued this remedy before Gerein C.J.Q.B. and obtained a declaration that the government’s action of reducing the herd certification status was unlawful and invalid. No parallel action lies in tort.