University of Calgary Faculty of Law ABLawg.ca logo over mountains

Applicants to a Feed-in Tariff Program Must Expect Change

By: Nigel Bankes

PDF Version: Applicants to a Feed-in Tariff Program Must Expect Change

Case Commented On: Skypower CL 1 LP et al v Minister of Energy (Ontario) et al, 2012 ONSC 4979

In an earlier post entitled “Low carbon energy policies: vested rights, legitimate expectations and differential treatment in domestic and international law” (see here). I commented on a UK case involving changes to a feed-in tariff (FIT) program as well as a couple of ongoing international arbitrations against Canada involving provincial energy policies (one in British Columbia and one in Ontario, the Mesa Power arbitration). The Skypower decision which is the subject of this post involves changes to Ontario’s FIT program. The common theme of all of these cases are the legal implications for government where government changes its mind about the terms of incentive programs designed to encourage the uptake of low carbon forms of generation.

Walsh and Mobil Oil – The Long-Running Saga Continues

PDF version: Walsh and Mobil Oil – The Long-Running Saga Continues

Decision commented on: Walsh v Mobil Canada, 2012 ABQB 527

After several tribunal and court proceedings, taking place over the past 20+ years, Mobil was found to have discriminated against Delorie Walsh and to have retaliated against her for complaining by terminating her employment. There have been several blogs written about this case (see “Court of Appeal Rules in Walsh Case: End of a Seventeen Year Journey?”and “Justice Received After Nineteen Years Delay in Walsh Case: What’s to blame?”).

Cleaning Up Coal II

By: Astrid Kalkbrenner

PDF Version: Cleaning Up Coal II

Regulations Commented On: Federal Regulations “Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal-fired Generation of Electricity Regulations” as of 30 August 2012, (Canada Gazette Part II, Vol. 146, No 19, SOR/2012-167)

On 27 August 2011 the federal government published proposed regulations on the “Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal-Fired Generation of Electricity” (the “Draft Regulations”) (see my previous ABlawg post Cleaning up Coal).  The Draft Regulations were open for comments for a 60-day public consultation period. Environment Canada received over 5000 submissions during the consultation period, including submissions from 4 provincial governments, 16 electricity industry corporations and system operators, 17 other industry corporations and associations, 6 Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) and from the general public. The Regulatory Impact Assessment Statement (RIAS) for the Regulations acknowledges that the comments and extensive discussions with industry and provinces led to refinements of the Draft Regulations which in its final version provides greater flexibility to industry, while respecting the draft regulatory framework and maintaining the contribution of the Regulations to meeting Canada’s Copenhagen target (for the RIAS see Canada Gazette Part II, Vol. 146, No 19, SOR/2012-167, 2002 at 2003). On 30 August 2012, the final Regulations were published as a regulation of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), SC 1999, c 33.

Giving away the Arctic farm to piddly little companies – Federal (mis)management of northern oil and gas rights.

PDF version: Giving away the Arctic farm to piddly little companies – Federal (mis)management of northern oil and gas rights.

Decision commented on: The decision of the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (aka Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, Canada) to award new oil and gas rights pursuant to the 2011-2012 Beaufort Sea & Mackenzie Delta Call for Bids.

On September 12, 2012, the government of Canada announced that it would be granting exploration licences (ELs) to the small and low profile Franklin Petroleum Limited of the UK for six blocks of oil and gas rights in the Beaufort Sea.  The ELs will cover over 900,000 hectares of land.

Peter Lougheed’s Section 92A

PDF version: Peter Lougheed’s Section 92A

Commenting on: the legacy of section 92A of the Constitution Act, 1982

Exclusive” power of provincial legislatures to make laws for “exploration”; “development, conservation and management” of provincial non-renewable resources and forestry resources. Provinces can also regulate, (without price or supply discrimination) the export of these natural resources. This is the essence of section 92A of the Constitution Act 1982, a provision for which Peter Lougheed fought hard in the negotiations that led to patriation of the Canadian Constitution in 1982.

Page 311 of 422

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén