Focus On
NEW In-House Counsel | Insurance | Intellectual Property | Immigration | Natural Resources | Real Estate | Tax

Natural Resources

Latest

Thursday, March 02, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Marketing a green product? Make sure you can prove it 

Not applicable ... [read more]

Thursday, March 02, 2017 @ 8:47 AM

PUBLIC UTILITIES - Regulatory tribunals - Practice and procedure - Appeals - Provincial boards, tribunals and commissions

Application by five members of the Enoch Cree Nation for permission to appeal a decision by the Alberta Utilities Commission with a stay pending appeal. The decision at issue granted a final time extension for completion of construction of a TransAlta transmission line rebuild that crossed lands occupied by the Enoch Cree Nation. The applicants held certificates of possession, but were not party to any of the prior proceedings, including the Commission's initial decision approving the rebuild. The applicants sought to appeal the Commission's final time extension decision on the basis TransAlta should have obtained a s. 28(2) Indian Act permit prior to conducting the work, the Commission failed to give notice of the request for a time extension, and the prior decisions of the Commission ought not to have been granted. ... [read more]

Monday, February 27, 2017 @ 9:46 AM

City of Vancouver votes for judicial review of Kinder Morgan pipeline

Vancouver City Council voted to pursue a judicial review of the province’s approval of the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion. ... [read more]

Friday, February 24, 2017 @ 8:55 AM

OIL AND GAS - Conservation and licensing - Provincial regulation - Alberta - Pipelines - Intra-provincial

Application by landowners for permission to appeal a decision by the Alberta Energy Regulator granting approvals in favour of Pembina Pipeline Corporation. Pembina applied for permits to construct two pipelines. The applicants were landowners along the proposed right-of-way. Collectively, they owned approximately one-third of the land traversed by the proposed pipelines. During the public hearing process, the applicants raised several site-specific concerns related to routing, depth, width, and monitoring. Pembina provided a spreadsheet that listed each landowner, a legal description of their land, that landowner's particular concerns, and the company's response to those concerns with related information. Pembina made representatives available for cross-examination on the information provided. Following the evidentiary portion of the process, Pembina updated the spreadsheet to list commitments it was prepared to take with respect to some of the site-specific concerns. Further cross-examination on the added commitments was refused. The Regulator approved the pipelines, subject to certain conditions. The Regulator stated that the conditions reflected some of the commitments made by Pembina, and noted the ability of individual landowners to negotiate directly with Pembina where appropriate. The applicants sought permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. ... [read more]

Thursday, February 23, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Natural Resources Law - OIL AND GAS - Conservation and licensing - Provincial regulation - Alberta - Pipelines - Intra-provincial

Application by landowners for permission to appeal a decision by the Alberta Energy Regulator granting approvals in favour of Pembina Pipeline Corporation. Pembina applied for permits to construct two pipelines. The applicants were landowners along the proposed right-of-way. Collectively, they owned approximately one-third of the land traversed by the proposed pipelines. During the public hearing process, the applicants raised several site-specific concerns related to routing, depth, width, and monitoring. Pembina provided a spreadsheet that listed each landowner, a legal description of their land, that landowner’s particular concerns, and the company’s response to those concerns with related information. Pembina made representatives available for cross-examination on the information provided. Following the evidentiary portion of the process, Pembina updated the spreadsheet to list commitments it was prepared to take with respect to some of the site-specific concerns. Further cross-examination on the added commitments was refused. The Regulator approved the pipelines, subject to certain conditions. The Regulator stated that the conditions reflected some of the commitments made by Pembina, and noted the ability of individual landowners to negotiate directly with Pembina where appropriate. The applicants sought permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. ... [read more]

Thursday, February 16, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Guatemalan miners can sue in Canada, appeal court rules

Not applicable ... [read more]

Thursday, February 16, 2017 @ 11:40 AM

Former OSC official joins Pallett Valo

Pallett Valo LLP welcomes Barbara Hendrickson to its business law practice. ... [read more]

Monday, February 06, 2017 @ 4:21 PM

Former Hydro-Québec executive Desgagné joins Langlois lawyers

Langlois lawyers has announced that Pierre-Luc Desgagné has joined the firm's business law team, advising on matters of energy law, environmental law, governance, transportation law, governmental affairs, statutory construction and negotiation strategy. ... [read more]

Friday, February 03, 2017 @ 11:42 AM

ABORIGINAL LAW - Aboriginal Lands - Duties of the Crown - Fair dealing and reconciliation - Consultation and accommodation

Appeal by Canadian Silica Industries Inc. and Jeffrey Bond (collectively, “CSI”) and the Director of the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO) from the decision in a judicial review proceeding instituted by the Fort Nelson First Nation. The underlying dispute centered on the CSI frac sand mine, located in the traditional territory of the First Nation. CSI had applied to move the mine into production. The First Nation wrote to the EAO, expressing concern that the project was reviewable, requiring an environmental assessment. It argued that production capacity for the project exceeded the numeric threshold for reviewability based on the total amount of sand and gravel to be excavated. Before the EAO could respond to the First Nation, CSI sent a letter seeking confirmation of its view that the project was not reviewable because the production level for products to be sold and used from the operation would be less than 240,000 tonnes per year. The EAO wrote back to CSI, placing responsibility with CSI to determine whether or not the project met the threshold for reviewability. In the letter, the EAO stated that a project with the capacity of CSI’s mine would not be reviewable. The EAO then responded to the First Nation, acknowledging the First Nation’s interpretation of the term “production capacity”, while reiterating its position that production capacity included only sand and gravel produced for sale or use, not all excavated material. Further correspondence was exchanged between the EAO and the First Nation before the First Nation commenced its petition for judicial review. The judge found the EAO’s interpretation of the threshold for reviewability unreasonable. ... [read more]

Thursday, January 26, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

First Nation award called 'precedent setting'

A Saskatchewan First Nations band has been awarded $4.5 million by Specific Claims Tribunal Canada as compensation for retaliatory action taken in the late 19th century by the federal government under Prime Minister John A. MacDonald. ... [read more]