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

Natural Resources

Latest

Wednesday, June 28, 2017 @ 8:51 AM

TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS - Practice and procedure - Injunctions

Application by the plaintiff, the Blueberry River First Nations, for an interlocutory injunction. The plaintiff's underlying action alleged a breach of substantive Treaty 8 hunting rights and related fiduciary duties by the Province based on the cumulative effect of industrial development within the traditional lands. The plaintiff sought an injunction enjoining the Province from allowing further logging and oil and gas development, processing and transportation in critical segments of its traditional territory pending trial of the action. ... [read more]

Friday, June 23, 2017 @ 12:00 PM

Hughes brings energy practice to McCarthy Tétrault in Calgary

Energy lawyer Cameron Hughes, with 20 years of experience in the oil and gas and power industries in Alberta, has joined McCarthy Tétrault as a partner in the Calgary office. ... [read more]

Thursday, June 22, 2017 @ 2:51 PM

BINDING ARBITRATION - Submission to arbitration - Arbitrators - Powers and duties - Jurisdiction – Appeals - Deference to expertise of arbitrators - Jurisdiction of court to review

Appeal by Teal Cedar Products Ltd. (Teal) from a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal confirming a judgment setting aside the decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court which partially upheld an arbitrator’s decision. The province of British Columbia and Teal were unable to settle how much compensation the province owed to Teal for reducing the latter’s access to certain improvements on Crown land which it used to harvest timber. Consequently, their dispute was submitted to arbitration as required by the Forestry Revitalization Act (Act). In order to determine the proper valuation method for Improvements Compensation, the arbitrator chose the Depreciation Replacement Cost Method because it was the only valuation methodology that determined Improvements Compensation separately from harvesting rights compensation, in keeping with their separate treatment in the act. The arbitrator held that Teal was entitled to interest on the Improvements Compensation, despite the No Interest Clause contained in the Settlement Framework Agreement, in light of the factual matrix of the parties’ failed settlement negotiations. The British Columbia Supreme Court essentially confirmed the arbitrator’s decision, only remitting the issue of Improvements Compensation for one of Teal’s timber supply areas, that of Lillooet. The British Columbia Court of Appeal ruled that the arbitrator’s award was, in this respect, both incorrect and unreasonable because it provided a “substantial publicly financed windfall” divorced from Teal’s actual financial loss. On the Interest Issue, the Court of Appeal opined that the arbitrator had made a legal error that gave the courts jurisdiction because he let the factual matrix overwhelm the Settlement Framework Agreement, despite the latter’s clear wording. The decision of the Court of Appeal on remand was silent in respect of the Lillooet Issue. The appeal involved two key interpretation issues, namely whether the arbitrator erred in law by: (1) interpreting the Depreciation Replacement Cost Method as being consistent with the act (the Valuation Issue); and (2) interpreting the Amended Settlement Framework Agreement as including interest in the province’s Improvements Compensation payment to Teal (the Interest Issue). This appeal also involved a statutory application issue, namely whether the arbitrator erred in law by denying Improvements Compensation to Teal when he applied his chosen methodology to the Lillooet Licence (the Lillooet Issue). ... [read more]

Friday, June 16, 2017 @ 1:26 PM

Osler appoints Bryce as new national managing partner

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP has made changes to its senior management team, appointing a new national managing partner and co-chairs of its partnership board. ... [read more]

Thursday, June 15, 2017 @ 1:20 PM

Wildeboer Dellelce founder awarded honorary doctorate of law

Wildeboer Dellelce announced that co-founder and managing partner Perry Dellelce was among four distinguished Canadians to receive an honorary doctorate of laws from Laurentian University at its spring 2017 convocation ceremonies in Sudbury, Ont. ... [read more]

Thursday, June 08, 2017 @ 8:37 AM

Mining royalties: is Quebec so different?

Recently, in Third Eye Capital Corp. v. Dianor Resources Inc. 2016 ONSC 6086, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice rendered a decision that illustrates the importance of carefully drafting and arranging royalty agreements if the intended result is to have the royalty interest “run with” the land — i.e., to be enforceable against third parties, such as new owners, instead of just a contractual right enforceable against the grantor personally. ... [read more]

Wednesday, June 07, 2017 @ 9:44 AM

Cochrane, Sangster join Fasken Martineau in Calgary

Gary Cochrane and Scott Sangster have left Dentons and joined the Calgary office of Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP as partners in the banking and finance group. ... [read more]

Thursday, May 25, 2017 @ 11:05 AM

McInnes Cooper associate works with seabed regulator on mining code

McInnes Cooper lawyer Elizabeth McIsaac is among the team members contributing to the development of the mining code for the International Seabed Authority (ISA). ... [read more]

Thursday, May 25, 2017 @ 8:47 AM

OIL AND GAS - Exploration - Survey - Seismic survey - Offshore

Appeal by Geophysical Service Incorporated (GSI) from the dismissal of its claims against multiple parties for unlawful disclosure and copyright infringement. GSI conducted offshore seismic studies and licensed its data for a fee to third parties for resource exploration. The regulatory regime pursuant to which GSI collected seismic data required it to obtain licences and authorizations from the National Energy Board and Newfoundland and Nova Scotia offshore petroleum boards. GSI was obliged to submit the data it acquired to the boards. After certain privilege periods expired, the boards permitted third parties to access and copy seismic data in their possession. GSI took the position that unfettered copying was not permitted by the regulatory regime, and that the boards were wrongfully permitting oil and gas companies to acquire valuable data without licensing the data from GSI or without paying GSI for the data. GSI took the position that third party commercial copying companies were thereby breaching its copyright to the acquired and retained seismic data. In dismissing GSI’s action against the boards, various oil and gas companies and companies involved in copying data, the court conducted a historical review of the regime and found that there had been a regulated process for obtaining permits coupled with a requirement to submit data to various regulatory bodies, and that this data had been made available for disclosure to the public after a certain period of time without compensation to the seismic data owners. The court was of the view that the Canada Petroleum Resources Act expressly affected GSI’s rights in its data once the five-year privilege period expired. The court found that the specificity of the regime trumped the more general legislative scheme governing copyright. ... [read more]

Wednesday, May 24, 2017 @ 2:43 PM

Dentons plans combination with Peruvian law firm

Dentons has announced it hopes to form a combination with Gallo Barrios Pickmann in Peru, one of the strongest and fastest-growing economies in Latin America. ... [read more]