Author: Nigel Bankes Page 2 of 88

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.

Case Commented On: Gitxaala v British Columbia (Chief Gold Commissioner), 2025 BCCA 430 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Gitxaala and the Conundrum of UNDRIP Implementing Legislation: The Sky Has Not Fallen In

This case, which commenced as a judicial review application, involved a challenge to the implementation and/or constitutional validity of British Columbia’s hard rock mineral regime under the terms of the Mineral Tenure Act, RSBC 1996, c 292 (MTA). The petitioners also claimed that the MTA regime was not consistent with the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP or UN Declaration) as required by section 3 of British Columbia’s “implementing” legislation, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, SBC 2019, c 44 (DRIPA). This post focuses on that aspect of the case which was the only live matter by the time the case got to the Court of Appeal. A majority of that Court found in favour of the petitioners while the dissent concluded that the matter was not justiciable.

Mine 14: It’s Worse Than We Thought

By Nigel Bankes

On November 6, 2025

In Access to Information, Administrative Law, Environmental

By: Nigel Bankes

Matter Commented On: Responsive Records to Access to Information Requests re Mine 14 Decision-Making

PDF Version: Mine 14: It’s Worse Than We Thought

An earlier ABlawg post described the manner in which Rob Morgan, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) unlawfully intervened in the Mine 14 adjudicative process then under the conduct of AER Hearing Commissioners. At the time we suggested that the CEO’s decision might have been the result of political pressure brought to bear on Mr. Morgan. The access to information requests discussed in this post strengthen that supposition and also provide evidence of improper communication between Mr. Morgan (and others at the AER) with Vitor Marciano the Chief of Staff of Brian Jean, Minister of Energy and Minerals.

Taking Stock of the Grassy Mountain Project and Other Coal Matters: Update 4, October 2025

By Nigel Bankes

On October 23, 2025

In Administrative Law, Energy, Environmental, Natural Resources, Responsible Energy Development Act

By: Nigel Bankes & Drew Yewchuk

Cases and Decisions Commented On: Northback Holdings Corporation v. Alberta Energy and Joint Review Panel For the Grassy Mountain Coal Project acting in its capacity as the Alberta Energy Regulator, 2025 CanLII 99179 (SCC) and Northback Holdings Corporation v. Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2025 FCA 31 (CanLII).

PDF Version: Taking Stock of the Grassy Mountain Project and Other Coal Matters: Update 4, October 2025

In addition to ABlawg’s coal law and policy series and the Coal Law and Policy ebook, we have provided occasional posts updating readers on the status of the Grassy Mountain Coal project and the related litigation. As the title of the post suggests, this is the fourth update following earlier updates in February 2024, August 2024, and June 2025.

Benga, now known as Northback, first applied for permits for the Grassy Mountain Coal Project in May 2015 (GM.1). A Joint Review Panel (JRP) consisting of federal and provincial regulators held a hearing from October 2020 to January 2021. The JRP report in June 2021 denied provincial permits for the project and in August 2021, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change denied federal permits for the project. Recognizing that the project requires both federal and provincial permits, Northback brought litigation relating to the provincial permits in Alberta courts and litigation relating to the federal permits in federal courts in its efforts to get the project approved. In order to revisit the JRP report and decision and revive GM.1, Northback needed to succeed with its litigation in both the Alberta courts and the federal courts. The most recent developments confirm that all of Northback’s attacks on the provincial decision-making have failed and GM.1 is dead and buried. While there is some outstanding litigation in the federal courts relating to GM.1, even if Northback or the First Nation applicants are successful, the remaining litigation cannot obtain the permits necessary for GM.1 to proceed.

Unlawful Production and Restitutionary Damages

By Nigel Bankes

On October 14, 2025

In Energy, Environmental, Natural Resources, Oil & Gas, Remedies

By: Nigel Bankes

Case Commented On: Signalta Resources Limited v Canadian Natural Resources Limited, 2025 ABCA 306 (CanLII) and Signalta Resources Limited v Canadian Natural Resources Limited, 2023 ABKB 108 (CanLII).

PDF Version: Unlawful Production and Restitutionary Damages

There are two principal substantive issues in this important unanimous decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal (referred to as ABCA decision). The first issue relates to the rules pertaining to the right of a Crown oil sands lessee (Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL)) to produce gas cap (or non-solution) gas in the course of producing oil sands (or bitumen) when the Crown has leased the natural gas rights in the same location (and indeed the same formation) to another party (Signalta). The second substantive issue relates to the legal consequences of the unlawful production of somebody else’s natural gas, specifically the assessment of damages for such unlawful production.

The Government of Alberta’s Commitment to Protect Alberta’s Water from Selenium Pollution

By Nigel Bankes

On October 1, 2025

In Energy, Environmental, Natural Resources, Responsible Energy Development Act

By: Nigel Bankes, David Luff, and Neil Kathol

Matters Commented On: (1) Press Conference on the Coal Industry Modernization Initiative, December 20, 2024, (2) Bringing Alberta Coal Mining into the 21st Century, and (3) Your Province, Your Premier, January 25, 2025.

PDF Version: The Government of Alberta’s Commitment to Protect Alberta’s Water from Selenium Pollution

Over the course of the past ten months the Government of Alberta, through statements made by Premier Smith and Ministers Jean and Schulz, has committed to ensure that, going forward, the end of pipe discharge standard for selenium for all coal mines in the province will be 0 micrograms per litre (the zero-discharge standard) i.e., no new mines may operate or obtain permits to operate if there is any chance they could discharge any amount of additional selenium into surface or groundwater, or by windblown particulates.

Author: Nigel Bankes Page 2 of 88

Gitxaala and the Conundrum of UNDRIP Implementing Legislation: The Sky Has Not Fallen In

Mine 14: It’s Worse Than We Thought

Taking Stock of the Grassy Mountain Project and Other Coal Matters: Update 4, October 2025

Unlawful Production and Restitutionary Damages

The Government of Alberta’s Commitment to Protect Alberta’s Water from Selenium Pollution