Presenters: Martin Ignasiak, Partner, Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP; Sandy Carpenter, Partner, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
PDF Version: Hamlet of Clyde River and Chippewas of the Thames First Nation – Impact on Alberta’s Administrative Tribunals: Alberta Energy Regulator, Alberta Utilities Commission, Natural Resources Conservation Board, National Energy Board
Summarized by: Moira Lavoie (JD Candidate, University of Alberta)
Editor’s Note: This is the second in a series of blog posts that provides summaries of presentations from the ninth annual Energy Regulatory Forum, held in Calgary on May 28, 2018, as summarized by student attendees.
In July 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada released a set of decisions dealing with the duty to consult where an administrative agency serves as the final decision maker: Clyde River (Hamlet) v. Petroleum Geoservices Inc. 2017 SCC 40 (CanLII) and Chippewas of the Thames First Nation v Enbridge Pipelines Inc. 2017 SCC 41 (CanLII). Sandy Carpenter, counsel for the proponent in Clyde River, and Martin Ignasiak, counsel for Suncor in Chippewas, provided an overview of the two decisions and their implications for administrative agencies moving forward. In both cases the National Energy Board (NEB) was the final decision-maker on the proposed projects. The Crown was not involved in making the decision nor as a project proponent in either case.
Read More