Cases Considered: Provident Energy Ltd. v. Alberta (Utilities Commission), 2008 ABCA 316
PDF Version: Obtaining Leave to Intervene in a Leave to Appeal Application
This decision deals with a unique and interesting point of civil procedure. It answers the following question: what is the test for obtaining leave to intervene in a leave to appeal application before Alberta’s Court of Appeal?
Cases Considered: Tsuu T’ina First Nation v. Alberta, 2008 ABQB 547
PDF Version: Water management planning and the Crown’s duty to consult and accommodate
*Thanks to Christina Smith and Monique Passelac-Ross for comments on an earlier draft.
Alberta’s new Water Act (R.S.A. 2000, c. W-3) calls for the development of water management plans (Part 2(1) of the Act). Once adopted, a water management plan will guide decision-making within the area of the plan on a range of matters, including the issuance and transfer of water licences. Because of concerns that the waters in parts of the South Saskatchewan River Basin (SSRB) were already over-allocated, the Government put a priority on developing a plan for the SSRB. The first phase of the plan was approved in June 2002 and the second and final phase was approved by Cabinet in August 2006 (http://environment.alberta.ca/documents/SSRB_Plan_Phase2.pdf).
Cases Considered: R. v. Karmis, 2008 ABQB 525
PDF Version: Lawyers, Clients, Parties and the Right to Counsel
The right to counsel is a revered constitutional right in Canada, but casting aside the understandings of this right that derive from American television shows, what does it really mean? Does it include, for example, the right to retain counsel of one’s own choosing? What if the proposed lawyer was present at the scene of the alleged crime, although not an actual witness to the events? This was the scenario in R. v. Karmis, where a man accused of assault causing bodily harm sought to hire a lawyer who happened to be present at the party where the alleged events occurred.
Cases Considered: R. v. White, 2008 ABCA 294
PDF Version: Alberta Court of Appeal Upholds Constitutionality of Deferring Publication of Information Given at Bail Hearings
In these days of flagrant disregard of publication restrictions, especially by “electronic ban breakers” (in the case of Karla Homolka, for example), it is interesting to see yet another case where various traditional media sought to strike down a provision of the Criminal Code dealing with the publication of evidence heard in bail proceedings.
Cases Considered: R. v. Caron, 2008 ABPC 232
Caron v. Alberta (Human Rights and Citizenship Commission), 2008 ABCA 272.
PDF Version: La Belle Province? Developments in Alberta Language Rights Cases
On August 18, 2008 the Alberta Provincial Court posted its long awaited decision in the case of Gilles Caron. Caron was charged under an Alberta regulation with making an unsafe left turn, and sought to defend on the basis of a violation of his language rights, arguing that Alberta legislation is invalid because it is not enacted in both English and French. His case was initially fought on the issue of whether he was entitled to an interim costs award to permit him to pursue his constitutional challenge in the absence of funding from the Court Challenges program (see my earlier posts on this issue: Special Enough? Interim Costs and Access to Justice and Stay Of Interim Funding Denied In Language Rights Case). In a 96 page decision written in French, Judge L.J. Wenden of the Alberta Provincial Court found in favour of Caron’s language rights claim and accordingly dismissed his traffic offence (2008 ABPC 232).
Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén
