Page 24

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case commented on: Sheehan v Samuelson, 2023 NSSM 27 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Can the Failure to Pay for Sexual Services Form the Basis of a Contractual Claim?

Pat and Al enter into a contract. Pat will drywall Al’s basement in exchange for $2,100. Pat drywalls Al’s basement but Al refuses to pay. Al breached his contractual obligations to Pat and would be liable for damages. Now, keep all the facts the same but assume that the service is sex work as opposed to dry walling – does that change the analysis at all?

Sometimes it is Completely Irrelevant Whether or not a Royalty Interest Amounts to an Interest in Land

By Nigel Bankes

On August 28, 2023

In Energy, Land Use, Property

By: Nigel Bankes

Case commented on: Enerplus Corporation v Harvest Operations Corp, 2021 ABQB 634 (CanLII), appeal dismissed, 2023 ABKB 482 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Sometimes it is Completely Irrelevant Whether or not a Royalty Interest Amounts to an Interest in Land

Harvest (70%), Orlen (15%), and Petrus (15%) are the working interest owners of certain oil and gas properties. Under the terms of a farmout agreement (in the form of the 1997 Farmout and Royalty Procedure of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Landmen (CAPL)), back in the chain of title, Enerplus holds a gross overriding royalty interest (GORR) in the 70% interest currently held by Harvest. The terms of the GORR provided that:

An Incredibly Ill-Advised and Unnecessary Decision

By Nigel Bankes

On August 9, 2023

In Energy

By: Nigel Bankes and Martin Olszynski

Decision Commented On: Generation Approvals Pause Regulation, OiC 172/2023, August 2, 2023

PDF Version: An Incredibly Ill-Advised and Unnecessary Decision

On August 3, 2023 the Government of Alberta announced that the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) will pause approvals of new renewable electricity generation projects over one megawatt until February 29, 2024. As further set out below, this “pause” is entirely unnecessary to achieve the government’s stated goals; it is also astoundingly hypocritical and undermines confidence in the stability of Alberta’s regulatory framework insofar as it singles out renewable energy projects for special treatment.

Conflict in Paradise

By Nigel Bankes

On August 3, 2023

In Land Use, Oil & Gas

By: Nigel Bankes

Decisions Commented On: (1) AUC Decision 27589-D01-2023, Nova Solar G.P. Inc. and AltaLink Management Ltd., Nova Solar Power Plant and Transmission Connection, July 19, 2023; and (2) AUC letter decision on standing, October 31, 2022 (AUC’s Standing Ruling).

PDF Version: Conflict in Paradise

New and different resource uses may give rise to conflict or competition, and many have been discussed on ABlawg’s pages. Examples include:

(1) competition between natural gas storage operations and conventional oil and gas operation, (see for example Bankes, “Kallisto #2. Competing Uses of Geological Space: Resolving Conflicts Between Oil Production and Natural Gas Storage Interests”);

(2) competition for underground disposal capacity, (see, for example Bankes, “Sharing Geological Pore Space Disposal Capacity” as well as a complex and ongoing regulatory matter involving CNRL and Greenfire Resources before the Alberta Energy Regulator); and

(3) competition between proposed carbon capture and storage operations and a variety of conventional and non-conventional resource activities, (see for example, Ettinger et al, “Alberta’s Carbon Capture & Storage Land Grab And The Potential For Conflicts Of Subsurface Rights”).

Mind the Gap: A New Tort of Harassment in Alberta

By Jennifer Koshan

On July 31, 2023

In Torts

By: Jennifer Koshan

Case Commented On: Alberta Health Services v Johnston, 2023 ABKB 209 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Mind the Gap: A New Tort of Harassment in Alberta

The law of torts is as old as the mythical reasonable man, but courts continue to create new torts that respond to changing social circumstances and formally recognize novel legal wrongs. In recent years, courts in Canada have accepted new torts such as intrusion upon seclusion (Jones v Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32 (Can LII)), public disclosure of private facts (ES v Shillington, 2021 ABQB 739 (Can LII)), family violence (Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, 2022 ONSC 1303 (CanLII)), and harassment (Alberta Health Services v Johnston, 2023 ABKB 209 (CanLII)). In the first three cases, courts focused on gaps in existing legal doctrine and remedies as the basis for creating the new torts. In the fourth case, Johnston, Justice Colin Feasby decided that a tort of harassment was worthy of recognition, in part to explain the use of an existing remedy – common law restraining orders. His analysis is the subject of this post; a subsequent post will discuss Ahluwalia’s creation of the tort of family violence, which was recently overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal (see 2023 ONCA 476 (CanLII)).