PDF version: Lame duck constitutional arguments: a new twist on Syncrude’s Tailings Pond Debacle
The dead duck saga continues. In a previous post on ABlawg (R. v. Syncrude Canada: The Case of The 500 Dead Ducks), Shaun Fluker left off with the words “stay tuned”. Stay tuned, indeed. As it turns out, Syncrude Canada is contemplating making this relatively mundane regulatory (albeit environmentally significant) offence a little more interesting.
Case considered: Brookfield Bridge Lending Fund Inc. v. Vanquish Oil and Gas Corporation, 2009 ABCA 99, reversing 2008 ABQB 444
PDF version: Court of Appeal rejects the constructive trust analysis in Brookfield
The Court of Appeal by a 2:1 majority (Justices Frans Slatter and Patricia Rowbotham for the majority, Justice Ronald Berger dissenting) has overruled the decision at trial by Justice Bruce McDonald to impose a constructive trust on the assets of an operator beyond the express trust provided for by clause 507 of the CAPL Agreement. Continue reading
Case considered: Desoto Resources Limited v Encana Corporation, 2009 ABQB 337
PDF version: Successful application for summary dismissal in an oil and gas lease validity case
In this case Jodie L. Mason, Master in Chambers, granted summary dismissal of an action brought by Desoto as proceedings to justify the continuation of its caveat. I have blogged on this fact pattern on a previous occasion as a comment on the Board’s decision to suspend Desoto’s licence.
By: Jennifer Koshan
PDF Version: Some Questions about the Decision to Reinstate the Cap on Damages for Soft Tissue Injuries
Case Commented On: Morrow v Zhang, 2009 ABCA 215, overturning 2008 ABQB 98
Last February, Associate Chief Justice Neil Wittmann of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench found that the $4000 cap on non-pecuniary damages for soft tissue injuries violated the equality rights of motor vehicle accident victims, and could not be justified as a reasonable limit under section 1 of the Charter (see my earlier post on this case: Not on Their Backs: Cap on Damages for Soft Tissue Injuries Struck Down; Court Denies Stay of Remedy Pending Appeal). This decision was overturned by the Alberta Court of Appeal on June 12, 2009. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Patricia Rowbotham (with Justices Elizabeth McFadyen and Clifton O’Brien concurring) held that when viewed in the context of the overall scheme of insurance reforms, the cap did not violate section 15 Charter equality rights. In addition to its significance for the auto insurance industry and Alberta drivers, this decision is of interest as the first judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal to consider section 15 since the Supreme Court of Canada set out a new approach to equality rights in R v Kapp, 2008 SCC 41. Continue reading
Case considered: Laasch v. Turenne, 2009 ABQB 267
PDF version: Enforcing a Montana Judgment in Alberta: A Perilous Pursuit
A Montana resident secures a large money judgment in his or her home state. The judgment creditor needs to enforce that judgment in Alberta because the judgment debtor resides and maintains assets in this province. You are retained to effect the enforcement of that judgment. What are the available options? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each? These questions lay at the heart of Laasch v. Turenne.
