ABLawg

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.

Supreme Court Sides with Law Societies in Trinity Western University Litigation

By Admin

On June 15, 2018

In Administrative Law, Constitutional, Ethics and the Legal Profession, Supreme Court of Canada

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.

Wind Energy Development on Public Lands in Alberta: A Missed Opportunity

By Allan Ingelson

On June 14, 2018

In Energy

By: Allan Ingelson

PDF Version: Wind Energy Development on Public Lands in Alberta: A Missed Opportunity

To date, most of the wind energy development in Alberta has been on private lands in the southern part of the province. As a result, private landowners and wind farm developers on private lands have reaped the financial benefits from electricity production. In 2010, we posed the following question: in light of the significant revenues secured by the Alberta government for decades from leasing public lands for hydrocarbon development, why has the provincial government not yet leased public lands for wind energy development? (Allan Ingelson & Ryan Kalt, Wind Farms on Alberta Crown Lands?, International Resources Industries & Sustainability Centre, University of Calgary, IRIS Executive Brief #10-02, March 17, 2010). Eight years later the Alberta Government has not yet adopted a wind energy rights disposition system to facilitate investment and the development of wind farms on public lands in the province. Unlike the governments of Ontario, B.C., Quebec, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and New Brunswick, the Government of Alberta has thus far missed out on the revenue-generating opportunity from leasing public lands to develop wind farms and generate electricity. Years ago, other provincial governments created and adopted wind energy lease systems for public lands, but Alberta has failed to do so and as a result wind farms are located on private lands.

Judicial Review is about the Legality of State Decision-Making

By Shaun Fluker

On June 11, 2018

In Administrative Law

By: Shaun Fluker

PDF Version: Judicial Review is about the Legality of State Decision-Making

Case Commented On: Highwood Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Judicial Committee) v Wall, 2018 SCC 26 (CanLII)

The Supreme Court of Canada has reversed the Alberta Court of Appeal decision in Wall v Judicial Committee of the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, 2016 ABCA 255 (CanLII) which ruled the Highwood Congregation decision to expel one of its members was subject to judicial review on the basis of an alleged breach of procedural fairness. In this unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court ruled that the Court of Appeal stretched the reach of judicial review too far in holding that this mechanism of judicial oversight applies to a decision of a non-state actor.

A Superior Court’s Inherent Jurisdiction to Infringe the Charter Right to a Jury Trial?

By Admin

On June 8, 2018

In Criminal, Human Rights

By: Admin

PDF Version: A Superior Court’s Inherent Jurisdiction to Infringe the Charter Right to a Jury Trial?

Case Commented On: R v Boisjoli, 2018 ABQB 410 (CanLII)

The decision of Justice Eldon J. Simpson in R v Boisjoli is unusual. On April 5, 2018, the Crown and the accused, Mr. Boisjoli, appeared before Justice Simpson to select jurors for a trial scheduled for the week of April 9. The charge (or one of the charges) was one of intimidation of a justice system participant, contrary to section 423.1 of the Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46. However, no jury was selected on April 5. Instead, Justice Simpson, by his own motion and under the claimed authority of the court’s inherent jurisdiction, ordered that Mr. Boisjoli’s trial go ahead as a trial by judge alone. Justice Simpson’s order was made because of the anticipated behavior of Mr. Boisjoli, i.e. that he intended to “artificially frustrate the jury selection process” (at para 24) and “disrupt and sabotage” the jury trial (at para 37). There was only a brief mention of Mr. Boisjoli’s Charter right to a trial by jury, and no Charter analysis. Instead, Justice Simpson relied upon an analogy to a section in the Criminal Code that equated an accused’s non-appearance with a waiver of a jury trial.