University of Calgary Faculty of Law ABLawg.ca logo over mountains

Author: Alastair Lucas, Q.C.

B.A., LL.B., (Alta.), LL.M., (Br. Col.).
Professor. Member of the Alberta Bar.
Please click here for more information.

The Rubber Hits the Road on Provincial Jurisdiction over Transportation Undertakings

Case Considered: Consolidated Fastfrate Inc. v. Western Canada Council of Teamsters, 2009 SCC 53

PDF version:  The Rubber Hits the Road on Provincial Jurisdiction over Transportation Undertakings

The Supreme Court of Canada, in a 6-3 decision late last year, came down squarely in favour of provincial jurisdiction over transportation undertakings such as freight forwarding companies not themselves involved in interprovincial transportation. Shippers do not become subject to federal jurisdiction under s.92(10)(a) of the Constitution Act, 1867 merely by contracting for interprovincial transportation of goods, even if the company’s service includes delivery of goods in a receiving province. A recent post on The Court considered the implications of this case for division of powers analysis; my post will consider the Court’s interpretive approach in a modern natural resources context.

Climate Change Legislation – Waiting for Obama; or Just Waiting

PDF Version: Climate Change Legislation – Waiting for Obama; or Just Waiting

Shaun Fluker’s environmental law non-event of the past decade  focused on case law (or lack thereof). My review of climate change legislation continues Shaun’s theme. We waited for federal legislation. Then we waited for the Obama climate change legislation. Now with the President’s Senate majority gone, how long can Canada continue to wait?

“Improper Jumps in Reasoning” on Judicial Disqualification says Court of Appeal

Cases Considered: Boardwalk REIT LLP v. Edmonton (City), 2008 ABCA 176

PDF Version: “Improper Jumps in Reasoning” on Judicial Disqualification says Court of Appeal

Enough already! That’s the Alberta Court of Appeal’s message on judicial disqualification applications. The court is not saying, “leave potential bias issues to us.” It is merely reinforcing the time honoured “reasonable apprehension of bias” principle. But there is a twist in this case. In fact, there are two.

Provincial Court Judges’ Professional Allowances and Judicial Independence

Cases Considered: Reilly v The Chief Judge of the Provincial Court of Alberta, 2008 ABCA 72,

PDF Version: Provincial Court Judges’ Professional Allowances and Judicial Independence

Provincial Court Judge John Reilly requested the approval of the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court of Alberta to use his professional allowance to attend a conference in Caux, Switzerland. The Caux conference’s focus was “Peace – Building Initiatives” and would also be attended by an Elder and three Chiefs of the Stoney Reserve. Judge Reilly’s jurisdiction includes the Stoney Reserve and he has long been interested in the administration of justice to Aboriginal peoples and the Stoney Nation in particular. All of this he set out in his request to the Chief Judge, relying upon the professional allowance established through the Provincial Court Judges and Masters in Chambers Compensation Regulation, A.R. 176/98 (“Compensation Regulation”), which reads:

Page 2 of 2

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén