Category: Administrative Law Page 3 of 39

Matter Commented On: Minister of Energy and Minerals, Ministerial Order 096/2024, Direction on Municipal Tax Requirements for Approving Licences

PDF Version: The Replacement Ministerial Directive on Well Transfers and Outstanding Municipal Taxes

On August 26, 2024, Minister of Energy and Minerals Brian Jean signed Ministerial Order 096/2024 (M.O. 096/2024), a direction to the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) pursuant to section 67 of the Responsible Energy Development Act, SA 2012, c R-17.3 (REDA). M.O. 096/2024 replaces a previous ministerial order from March 2023, with the most significant change being that the AER is now enabled to approve transfers of oil and gas licenses out of the inventories of bankrupt companies so long as the transferee owes less than $20,000 in municipal taxes.

Court of Appeal Grants Permission to Appeal Another AER Coal Decision

By Nigel Bankes

On October 8, 2024

In Administrative Law, Energy

By: Nigel Bankes

Decision Commented On: Ranchland (Municipal District No 66) v Alberta Energy Regulator, 2024 ABCA 309 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Court of Appeal Grants Permission to Appeal Another AER Coal Decision

While my recent coal posts (e.g. here and here) have focused on the efforts of Benga/Northback to resurrect (literally bring back from the dead) its Grassy Mountain Project, it is important to acknowledge that the coal policy decisions (the “flip/flop”) of the Kenney and Smith governments have triggered other litigation. Some of that litigation involves claims to compensation for alleged regulatory takings or constructive expropriation (see Cabin Ridge Project Limited v Alberta, 2024 ABKB 189 (CanLII)) but the case that is the subject of this post deals with other issues – reclamation and opaque AER decision-making.

Supreme Court of Canada Rules that Securities Commissions’ Administrative Penalties Do Not Survive Bankruptcy Discharge

By Jassmine Girgis

On September 9, 2024

In Administrative Law, Bankruptcy and Insolvency

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case commented on: Poonian v British Columbia (Securities Commission), 2024 SCC 28 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Supreme Court of Canada Rules that Securities Commissions’ Administrative Penalties Do Not Survive Bankruptcy Discharge

With the release of Poonian v British Columbia (Securities Commission), 2024 SCC 28 (CanLII), the Supreme Court of Canada has settled the question about the status of provincial securities commissions’ unpaid administrative penalties and discharge orders upon a bankrupt’s discharge. The Court determined that administrative penalties do not fall under the statutory exceptions in sections 178(1)(a) or (e) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 (BIA) meaning these penalties are discharged upon a bankrupt’s discharge. Disgorgement orders, however, are captured by the s 178(1)(e) exception, and will not be discharged.

Administrative Penalties at the Alberta Energy Regulator: Regulatory Penalties for the Kearl Oilsands Leak

By Drew Yewchuk

On September 4, 2024

In Administrative Law, Energy, Oil & Gas

By: Drew Yewchuk

Decisions Commented On: AER Notice of Administrative Penalty 202408-009, AER Administrative Sanction 202408-010, and AER News Release 2024-08-22

PDF Version: Administrative Penalties at the Alberta Energy Regulator: Regulatory Penalties for the Kearl Oilsands Leak

On August 22, 2024, the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) issued notice of administrative penalty 202408-009 (penalty decision) and administrative sanction 202408-010 (administrative sanction) (together, the ‘enforcement decisions’) imposing terms and conditions to Imperial Oil Resources Limited (Imperial Oil). The AER also issued a news release about these two enforcement actions. This post assesses the AER’s enforcement decisions and the justifications provided for them.

The New Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner Approach to Time Extensions for FOIP Requests

By Drew Yewchuk

On June 25, 2024

In Access to Information, Administrative Law

By: Drew Yewchuk

Administrative Policy Commented on: OIPC Practice Note Request for Time Extension Under FOIP Section 14

PDF Version: The New Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner Approach to Time Extensions for FOIP Requests

On June 17^th, 2024, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta (OIPC) changed their policy for Time Extension Requests Under Section 14 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP). The OIPC issued two new standardized forms and issued a practice note for public bodies seeking time extensions (the Practice Note). The OIPC’s attention to how they exercise their discretion in granting time extensions is encouraging and shows the OIPC is doing what it can to address the delay problem in Alberta FOIP. This post assesses a few of the more notable changes.