Author: Nigel Bankes Page 1 of 89

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.

Decision Commented On: Flowers v Persist Oil and Gas Inc, 2026 ABCA 172 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Bitcoin Real Property Law

In this decision, Alberta’s Court of Appeal has confirmed Justice Christopher Rickards’ decision of the Court of King’s Bench on this matter. 2025 ABKB 142 (CanLII). Both levels of court concluded that neither a surface lease nor a right of entry order provide the operator with the necessary proprietary authorization to run a bitcoin mining operation on the leased lands using natural gas from a compressor located on the lands and licensed by the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER). I refer readers to my ABlawg post on Justice Rickards’ decision for a more detailed examination of the background as well as two related decisions of Alberta’s Land and Property Rights Tribunal.

When is a Citizen Initiative Petition a Dead Parrot?

By Nigel Bankes

On May 21, 2026

In Aboriginal, Constitutional, Treaty Rights

By: Nigel Bankes

Decisions Commented On: Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation v Alberta (Chief Electoral Officer), 2026 ABKB 375 (CanLII) and Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation v Alberta (Chief Electoral Officer), 2026 ABKB 278 (CanLII).

PDF Version: When is a Citizen Initiative Petition a Dead Parrot?

In the main decision that is the subject of this post, Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation v Alberta (Chief Electoral Officer), 2026 ABKB 375 (CanLII) (ACFN) Justice Shaina Leonard of the Court of King’s Bench quashed the decision of Alberta’s Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) to issue an initiative petition to Mr. Mitch Sylvestre (the Proponent) under the Citizen Initiative Act, SA 2021, c C-13.2 (the CIA) on January 2, 2026. Sylvestre’s petition was a constitutional referendum proposal within the meaning of the CIA. The petition aimed to gather affirmative signatures for the following question: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta should cease to be a part of Canada to become an independent state?”

The Next Installment in the Continuing Debate Over Pore Space Conflict in Alberta

By Nigel Bankes

On May 8, 2026

In Administrative Law, Carbon Capture and Storage, Natural Resources

By: Nigel Bankes

Decisions Commented On: (1) Request for a Regulatory Appeal by E3 Lithium Ltd. (E3), April 14, 2026; (2) Request for a Regulatory Appeal by PrairieSky Royalty Ltd. (PrairieSky), April 14, 2026; and (3) Request for Regulatory Appeal by Canpar Holdings Ltd. (Canpar), April 14, 2026

PDF Version: The Next Installment in the Continuing Debate Over Pore Space Conflict in Alberta

On July 30, 2025, the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) granted an application from Enhance Energy Inc. (Enhance) for a CO₂ sequestration scheme approval under s 39(1)(d) of the Oil and Gas Conservation Act, RSA 2000, c O-6 (OGCA) for Enhance’s Origins Project. The AER granted Enhance its approval without holding a public hearing. The approval is available here. Enhance anticipates the sequestered CO₂ will result in a 4 km plume radius, up to a maximum radius of 5.6 km.

Bill 30, Expedited Project Approvals: Proponents Should Look Before They Leap

By Nigel Bankes

On April 24, 2026

In Administrative Law, Energy, Environmental, Natural Resources

By: Nigel Bankes and Drew Yewchuk

Matters Commented On: (1) Bill 30: Expedited 120 Day Approvals Act, first reading, April 14, 2026, (2) Press Release, Faster Approvals for Major Projects, April 14, 2026, (3) Bill-30, Streamlining project approvals, the press conference featuring Minister Jean, April 14, 2026.

PDF Version: Bill 30, Expedited Project Approvals: Proponents Should Look Before They Leap

This post examines Alberta’s Bill 30, a bill that proposes to offer a project proponent the option to seek expedited project approval. The post begins with an account of the reasons offered by the United Conservative Party (UCP) for the Bill, followed by an account of the expedited approval scheme that the bill proposes. It then offers a critique of some different aspects of Bill 30 before suggesting that a proponent should think carefully before accepting the government’s offer of an expedited process – it may be a poisoned chalice.

The Next Shoe Drops. The Northback (Grassy Mountain) Interests File an International Investment Law Claim Against Canada

By Nigel Bankes

On April 14, 2026

In Energy, Environmental, International Investment

By: Nigel Bankes and Kyla Tienhaara

Matter Commented On: Request for Arbitration, Riversdale Resources Pty Ltd and Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd v Canada, December 16, 2024, and Notice of Intent to Submit a Claim, September 17, 2024

PDF Version: The Next Shoe Drops. The Northback (Grassy Mountain) Interests File an International Investment Law Claim Against Canada

In December 2024, the Australian parent companies of Northback Holdings (Northback) filed a Request for Arbitration (RFA) with Canada under the terms of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP or Agreement) alleging breach of Canada’s investment obligations under that Agreement. The claim follows the rejection of the Grassy Mountain coal project by a joint federal–provincial review panel and subsequent domestic litigation. The case is part of a broader trend of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) claims challenging environmental decision-making in resource projects.