Author: Nigel Bankes Page 9 of 87

Nigel Bankes is emeritus professor of law at the University of Calgary. Prior to his retirement in June 2021 Nigel held the chair in natural resources law in the Faculty of Law.

Worrying About Reclamation and Abandonment Obligations in the Context of Property Assignment Consents

By Nigel Bankes

On February 22, 2023

In Energy, Natural Resources, Provincial Court, Uncategorized

By: Nigel Bankes and Drew Yewchuk

Case commented on: Canadian Natural Resources Limited v Harvest Operations Corp, 2023 ABKB 62 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Worrying About Reclamation and Abandonment Obligations in the Context of Property Assignment Consents

This decision is principally about when a court can or should grant partial summary judgment. For that reason alone, we anticipate that it will be appealed. But the underlying concern that led to this litigation was (and still is) the decision of Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) to contest assignments pursuant to a purchase and sale agreement (PSA) between Harvest Operations as the vendor and Spoke Resources as the purchaser. CNRL and Harvest were parties to some 170 agreements affected by the PSA, including 133 land agreements, 30 facility agreements, and 7 service agreements.

Do We Need a Forum Within Which to Discuss Issues of Electricity Law and Policy in Alberta?

By Nigel Bankes

On February 20, 2023

In Energy

By: Nigel Bankes

PDF Version: Do We Need a Forum Within Which to Discuss Issues of Electricity Law and Policy in Alberta?

I am not a technical electricity expert and I do not have day-to-day access to technical experts, but I have been following some of the law and policy issues in the electricity sector in Alberta over the last decade or so. I am concerned that we don’t have a suitable forum within which to publicly discuss and develop electricity law and policy for an increasingly decentralized electricity system that continues to decarbonize and has access to a greater diversity of generation. On top of this is the emerging policy of the “electrification of everything”. There is massive complexity here, but the public deserves to be involved in a discussion of the relevant issues.

Total Claims that its ROFR Rights Were Violated in the Sale of Teck’s Interest in the Fort Hills Project

By Nigel Bankes

On February 13, 2023

In Contracts, Energy

By: Nigel Bankes

Case commented on: TotalEnergies EP Canada Ltd v Suncor Energy Inc, 2023 ABKB 59 (CanLII).

PDF Version: Total Claims that its ROFR Rights Were Violated in the Sale of Teck’s Interest in the Fort Hills Project

Suncor, Total, and Teck all owned interests in the Fort Hills Oilsands Project (54%, 24.4%, and 21.5%, respectively). Teck agreed to sell its interest in the project to Suncor. The sale triggered a right of first refusal (ROFR) in the relevant agreement. The sale included some of Teck’s other assets (the other assets) but the sale was also subject to a condition precedent that required Teck to vote in favour of a proposed operating budget for the Project (the budget approval covenant). Suncor’s proposed operating budget had been hotly contested among the three partners for a number of years. Total and Teck had repeatedly voted against Suncor’s budget proposals, with the result that those budgets were not approved and operations had to revert to the last approved budget of 2021.

The Legal Status of a Gross Overriding Royalty Carved out of a Crown Lease

By Nigel Bankes

On January 11, 2023

In Oil & Gas, Property

By: Nigel Bankes

Decision commented on: PrairieSky Royalty Ltd v Yangarra Resources Ltd, 2023 ABKB 11

PDF Version: The Legal Status of a Gross Overriding Royalty Carved out of a Crown Lease

A Complex Oil and Gas Accounting Decision

By Nigel Bankes

On December 22, 2022

In Oil & Gas

By: Nigel Bankes

Case commented on: IFP Technologies (Canada) Inc v EnCana Midstream and Marketing, 2022 ABKB 807 (CanLII).

PDF Version: A Complex Oil and Gas Accounting Decision

Several years ago, I commented on both the original trial judgment in this case (2014 ABQB 470 (CanLII),following a six-week trial going back to 2011) and the Court of Appeal’s decision (2017 ABCA 157 (CanLII)). The posts are here and here. The Court of Appeal ultimately found in favour of IFP and ordered an accounting as the principal remedy but referred certain questions back to a trial judge to be assigned to hear the matter. This is that decision rendered by Justice Charlene Anderson.