ABLawg - - Page 279

The Continuing Fall-out from Stores Block: Guidance from the Alberta Utilities Commission on Utility Asset Disposition

On December 5, 2013

PDF Version: The Continuing Fall-out from Stores Block: Guidance from the Alberta Utilities Commission on Utility Asset Disposition

Decision commented on: Alberta Utilities Commission, Utility Asset Disposition, Decision 2013-417, November 26, 2013

In ATCO Gas & Pipelines Ltd. v Alberta (Energy and Utilities Board), 2006 SCC 4 (Stores Block), a majority decision of the Supreme Court of Canada (per Justice Bastarache), the Court concluded that the customers of a regulated utility had no property interest in the assets of a utility company that were included in the rate base. Accordingly, when a utility sought the approval of the Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) (now the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC or Commission)) for the disposition of a rate base asset outside the ordinary course of business, the EUB/AUC had no jurisdiction to require the utility, as a condition of the approval of the disposition, to allocate to the customers of the utility any share of the net proceeds of disposition beyond the depreciated book value of the asset in the utility’s accounts. In so ruling the Supreme Court of Canada reversed the long-standing practice of the EUB and its predecessors in sharing such gains between shareholders and customers. That long-standing practice is recounted in this decision at paras 19 – 32.

Supreme Court of Canada Expresses Its Opinion on Alberta Privacy Case

By Linda McKay-Panos

On December 4, 2013

In Constitutional, Labour/Employment, Supreme Court of Canada

PDF Version: Supreme Court of Canada Expresses Its Opinion on Alberta Privacy Case

Case commented on: Alberta Information and Privacy Commissioner v United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 401, 2013 SCC 62 (“AIPC v UFCW”)

This case out of Alberta has been the subject of other ABlawg posts (see here and here), and now the Supreme Court of Canada has made its views known on the constitutionality of Alberta’s privacy legislation. Clearly, the issues that were addressed were of interest across Canada as there were several interveners in the case, including the Attorneys General of Canada and Ontario, the Privacy Commissioners of Canada, Ontario and British Columbia, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association and labour and business groups.

Linking the California and Québec Emissions Trading Schemes

By Rolandas Vaiciulis

On December 3, 2013

In Climate Change

PDF Version: Linking the California and Québec Emissions Trading Schemes

Agreement Commented On: Agreement Between the California Air Resources Board and the Gouvernement Du Québec Concerning the Harmonization and Integration of Cap-and-Trade Programs for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions

In late September 2013, California and Québec signed an agreement to link their carbon emissions trading schemes effective January 1, 2014. This is the first linkage under the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) – a regional collaboration between British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Québec, and California to establish a carbon reduction and trading scheme that is intended to produce an overall 15% reduction from 2005 level carbon emissions by 2020 amongst the participating jurisdictions. (For more detail on the WCI see here). Alberta is notably absent from the WCI.

Limitations Issues in Oil and Gas Royalty Litigation

By Nigel Bankes

On December 2, 2013

In Oil & Gas

PDF Version: Limitations Issues in Oil and Gas Royalty Litigation

Case commented on: Canadian Natural Resources Limited v Jensen Resources Ltd., 2013 ABCA 399

This case involves a geologist’s gross overriding royalty (GORR). The principal issue at trial (see earlier post here) was the question of whether or not the royalty continued as against the property in question when the Crown issued oil sands leases for the oil sands rights in place of the earlier petroleum natural gas leases which were in force when the royalties crystallized. The trial judge held that the royalty did continue against these new leases and the Court of Appeal has confirmed that part of the award.

Judgment Handed Down in a Complex Petroleum and Natural Gas Lease Case

By Nigel Bankes

On November 29, 2013

In Oil & Gas

PDF Version: Judgment Handed Down in a Complex Petroleum and Natural Gas Lease Case

Case commented on: Stewart Estate v TAQA North Ltd, 2013 ABQB 691

This lengthy (121 page plus appendices) and well-reasoned decision will be essential reading for members of the oil and gas bar in Alberta. Justice Barbara Romaine offers guidance on a number of issues including the importance of having all relevant parties before the Court when seeking a declaration as to lease validity, limitations, the interpretation of the term “lack of or intermittent market” and the term “any cause whatsoever beyond the Lessee’s reasonable control”, and the measure of damages where a lessee produces on a dead lease. Given the length of the decision (much of which is taken up with a careful review of the testimony of expert witnesses) I will limit this post to the above legal questions. There are, however, a number of other issues discussed in the decision that this post does not deal with (e.g. estoppel, leave and licence, champerty and maintenance, etc).

Read More