Energy Regulatory Forum: Agency Counsel Update

Presenters: Meighan G. LaCasse, Counsel, Alberta Energy Regulator; Katherine Murphy, Associate General Counsel, National Energy Board; JP Mousseau, Counsel, Alberta Utilities Commission

Summarized by: Aaron Johnson, Law Student, University of Alberta

PDF Version: Energy Regulatory Forum: Agency Counsel Update

Editor’s Note: This is the third in a series of blog posts that provides summaries of presentations from the ninth annual Energy Regulatory Forum, held in Calgary on May 28, 2018, as summarized by student attendees.

Continue reading →

The Supreme Court of Canada’s Pay Equity Decisions: A Call to Action for Alberta?

By: Jennifer Koshan

PDF Version: The Supreme Court of Canada’s Pay Equity Decisions: A Call to Action for Alberta?

Case Commented On: Quebec (Attorney General) v. Alliance du personnel professionnel et technique de la santé et des services sociaux, 2018 SCC 17 (CanLII); Centrale des syndicats du Québec v. Quebec (Attorney General), 2018 SCC 18 (CanLII)

Alberta does not have strong pay equity legislation. The Alberta Human Rights Act, RSA 2000, c A-25.5, only guarantees equal pay to employees of both sexes for “the same or substantially similar work” for the same employer (s 6). Most other Canadian jurisdictions require employers to pay male and female employees equal pay for work of equal value in either human rights legislation (see e.g. Canadian Human Rights Act, RSC 1985, c H-6, s 11; Quebec’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, CQLR, c C-12, s 19) and / or in stand alone pay equity legislation  (see e.g. Quebec’s Pay Equity Act, RSQ 1996, c 43, which applies to public and private employers, and Prince Edward Island’s Pay Equity Act, RSPEI 1988, c P-2, which applies to the public sector), or they have pay equity negotiating frameworks for some public sector employees (see here). Not unexpectedly, a 2016 Parkland Institute report written by Kathleen Lahey found that Alberta has the largest gender income gap in Canada at 41%, a gap which is often larger for women who are racialized (including Indigenous women) or have disabilities (at 21). The report recommended that Alberta design “robust” pay equity legislation “capable of significantly improving the economic status of women in Alberta” (at 2, 3).

Two recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions shed some light on whether Alberta is constitutionally obliged to enact more robust pay equity legislation (see Quebec (Attorney General) v. Alliance du personnel professionnel et technique de la santé et des services sociaux, 2018 SCC 17 (CanLII) (Alliance du personnel professionnel); Centrale des syndicats du Québec v. Quebec (Attorney General), 2018 SCC 18 (CanLII) (Centrale des syndicats)). This post will explore the implications of these decisions for the government’s pay equity obligations in Alberta. A future post with Jonnette Watson Hamilton will discuss in more detail the Court’s approach to equality rights under s 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in these cases.

Continue reading →

Hamlet of Clyde River and Chippewas of the Thames First Nation – Impact on Alberta’s Administrative Tribunals: Alberta Energy Regulator, Alberta Utilities Commission, Natural Resources Conservation Board, National Energy Board

Presenters: Martin Ignasiak, Partner, Osler Hoskin & Harcourt LLP; Sandy Carpenter, Partner, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

PDF Version: Hamlet of Clyde River and Chippewas of the Thames First Nation – Impact on Alberta’s Administrative Tribunals: Alberta Energy Regulator, Alberta Utilities Commission, Natural Resources Conservation Board, National Energy Board

Summarized by: Moira Lavoie (JD Candidate, University of Alberta)

Editor’s Note: This is the second in a series of blog posts that provides summaries of presentations from the ninth annual Energy Regulatory Forum, held in Calgary on May 28, 2018, as summarized by student attendees.

In July 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada released a set of decisions dealing with the duty to consult where an administrative agency serves as the final decision maker: Clyde River (Hamlet) v. Petroleum Geoservices Inc. 2017 SCC 40 (CanLII) and Chippewas of the Thames First Nation v Enbridge Pipelines Inc. 2017 SCC 41 (CanLII). Sandy Carpenter, counsel for the proponent in Clyde River, and Martin Ignasiak, counsel for Suncor in Chippewas, provided an overview of the two decisions and their implications for administrative agencies moving forward. In both cases the National Energy Board (NEB) was the final decision-maker on the proposed projects. The Crown was not involved in making the decision nor as a project proponent in either case.

Continue reading →

Electricity Aspects of the Low Carbon Policy, Including Capacity Market Developments

Editor’s Note:

On May 28, 2018, regulatory law practitioners, representatives from regulatory bodies, and academics met in Calgary for the ninth annual Energy Regulatory Forum to discuss the state of regulatory law in Canada. These discussions focused on updates on recent judicial decisions, forecasting future solutions to Canadian regulatory law, and closed with updates from major energy agencies.

This will be the first of a series of blog posts, which will provide summaries of presentations from the forum, as summarized by student attendees.

******************************************************************************

Electricity Aspects of the Low Carbon Policy, Including Capacity Market Developments

PDF Version: Electricity Aspects of the Low Carbon Policy, Including Capacity Market Developments

Presenter: Miranda Keating Erickson (Vice-President, Markets, Alberta Electric System Operator)

Summarized by: Logan Lazurko (JD Candidate 2020, University of Calgary)

On May 28, 2018, Miranda Keating Erickson, Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) , presented at the annual Alberta Regulators Forum. Ms. Erickson spoke on AESO’s core responsibilities, Alberta’s evolving electricity industry, the renewable energy program, and the capacity market transition.

Continue reading →

Supreme Court Sides with Law Societies in Trinity Western University Litigation

This morning the Supreme Court of Canada released its decisions in Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, 2018 SCC 32 (CanLII) and Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2018 SCC 33 (CanLII). A majority of the Court upheld the decisions of the Law Societies of British Columbia and Upper Canada to deny accreditation to or approval of Trinity Western University (TWU) law school. For readers wanting more context for the Supreme Court decisions, please see previous ABlawg posts on TWU here, and watch for analysis of the decisions on ABlawg in the coming days.