Author Archives: David V Wright

About David V Wright

M.A. (Dalhousie), J.D. (Dalhousie), LL.M. (Stanford). Associate Professor. Please click here for more information.

Rigs in a Parlour: The Freedom Convoy and the Law of Private Nuisance

By: David V Wright and Martin Olszynski

PDF Version: Rig in a Parlour: The Freedom Convoy and the Law of Private Nuisance

Matter Commented On: Li v Barber et al, Court File No CV-22-00088514-00CP

After more than a week of disruptive, and at times highly offensive, protesting in the nation’s capital, private law has been engaged. Specifically, residents of the inner downtown area applied to the Ontario Superior Court for injunctive relief (essentially, a temporary ban on certain conduct) and for damages under the tort of private nuisance. This post discusses the basic elements and principles of private nuisance as they relate to the present context (we do not comment on procedural aspects – e.g., certification of the proceeding as a class action). Our preliminary assessment is that the prospects for success on the question of private nuisance are very good. Early indications from the Court are consistent with this assessment, as Justice Hugh McLean of the Ontario Superior Court granted an interim injunction on Monday (copy of the Court order here). In doing so, Justice McLean indicated that the right of citizens to peace and quiet was the overriding right (see this detailed thread on Twitter summarizing the Court proceedings). Continue reading →

Preliminary Reflections on COP26 and the Glasgow Climate Pact, Part 2

By: David V. Wright

PDF Version: Preliminary Reflections on COP26 and the Glasgow Climate Pact, Part 2

Matter Commented On: COP26 (Twenty-sixth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) and the Glasgow Climate Pact (Decision -/CMA.3)

Developments in UNFCCC & Paris Agreement Implementation

This post is Part 2 of two posts presenting preliminary reflections soon after the conclusion of COP26 in Glasgow. In this part, I present and briefly discuss notable developments (or lack of) within the formal negotiations process with respect to the implementation of the Paris Agreement and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC).

A key objective for this particular conference was to finalize the rulebook for implementation of the Paris Agreement (see this helpful background document on the Paris Agreement and rulebook). This did indeed happen, and most would agree that this constitutes a success even if there is discontent with some of the final features. It is a particularly significant step forward as there was a risk that Parties would not reach an agreement on the rulebook entirely, resulting in further delay in implementation (on top of losing a year due to a pandemic-induced postponement last year) and loss of confidence in the basic structure and approach of the Paris Agreement. The following discusses several of the notable developments on the rulebook front, as well as several other (but not all) matters. Continue reading →

Preliminary Reflections on COP26 and the Glasgow Climate Pact, Part 1

By: David V. Wright

PDF Version: Preliminary Reflections on COP26 and the Glasgow Climate Pact, Part 1

Matter Commented On: COP26 (Twenty-sixth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) and the Glasgow Climate Pact (Decision -/CMA.3)

This is the first of two posts that discuss several notable developments from COP26, some of which took place within the formal negotiations process (e.g. market mechanism rules, financial assistance), and some of which took place in parallel (e.g. Global Methane Pledge, US-China bilateral announcement). This post is focused on the latter parallel developments, which primarily emerged in the first week of the conference. My next post will focus on the former, which largely materialized in the second week.

Overall, the stakes were particularly high at this COP because the parties needed to reach an agreement on final elements of the rulebook containing details of how the Paris Agreement would be implemented, many parts of which will be the most important and consequential as implementation unfolds in years to come. Additionally, a number of long-standing issues remain unresolved, including with respect to long-term financial assistance for the most vulnerable countries to reduce emissions and respond to the impacts of climate change. Overall, COP26 was a key juncture for ensuring that party commitments would add up to keeping within reach the overarching goal of keeping global mean temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees. It was these high stakes that led some to characterize this COP as “now or never” and a “last-chance saloon” scenario. Continue reading →

An Important Number You’ve Likely Heard About: Recent Social Cost of Carbon Developments in the United States and Canada

By: David V Wright

 PDF Version: An Important Number You’ve Likely Heard About: Recent Social Cost of Carbon Developments in the United States and Canada

Matter Commented On: Biden Administration Executive Order 13990, “Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science To Tackle the Climate Crisis”

More than ten years ago, American economist Frank Ackerman called the social cost of carbon (SCC) “the most important number you’ve never heard of.” Times have changed. Today, the SCC figures prominently in climate policy discussions and analyses, and recent developments in Canada and the US are sure to reach any late adopters out there. That’s because the social cost of carbon (SCC) is a cornerstone in the Biden Administration’s ambitious climate action, and this comes at a time when Canada is showing a rejuvenated commitment to this important tool.

In this post, I present and comment on recent SCC developments at the federal levels in the US and Canada. There has been a flurry of climate law and policy activity on both sides of the border in recent weeks and months; this post helps make sense of it by focusing on the SCC specifically. In particular, I comment on Canada’s new federal climate change plan, the proposed Clean Fuel Standard regulations, and the all-important direction set out in President Biden’s executive order on climate change. I also touch on Canada’s new proposed climate change accountability regime, tabled as Bill C-12; the new federal impact assessment regime; and the federal carbon pricing regime. Overall, the Canadian federal government has taken significant steps on addressing climate change in recent years, though much critically important work remains to implement new law and policy levers in service of emissions reductions and decarbonization. My comments here really only scratch the surface of all that is going on in the climate and energy policy space these days. For more on many other topics, including interesting developments in Alberta (think coal, Allen inquiry, orphaned wells, clean tech) check out posts by my colleagues such as those here, here, here, here and here.

Continue reading →

Bill C-12, Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act: A Preliminary Review

By: David V. Wright

 PDF Version: Bill C-12, Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act: A Preliminary Review

Matter Commented On: Bill C-12, Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, 2nd Sess, 43rd Parl, 2020 (first reading 19 November 2020)

Just a few days ago, the federal government tabled Bill C-12, Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. This post provides a brief overview and preliminary reflections on the proposed law. Overall, the bill represents a significant milestone in Canadian climate policy, a realm that has been plagued by decades of setting-then-missing emission reduction targets. No previous federal government has so explicitly committed to a long-term emissions reduction pathway and milestones, let alone one with numerous accountability and transparency mechanisms. However, for reasons I discuss below, despite being characterized by the government as “binding”, the proposed law features a number of weaknesses and limitations. Further, while tabling this bill is a commendable step (especially if it becomes law), and is the result of many years of hard work and input from environmental organizations, it leaves difficult, long-standing conversations unaddressed.

Continue reading →