Playing Games with the Constitution: The Saskatchewan First Act

By: Nigel Bankes, Andrew Leach, and Martin Olszynski

Matter commented on: Bill 88: An Act to Assert Saskatchewan’s Exclusive Legislative Jurisdiction and to Confirm the Autonomy of Saskatchewan

PDF Version: Playing Games with the Constitution: The Saskatchewan First Act

On November 1, 2022, Bronwyn Eyre, as Minister of Energy and Resources and Minister of Justice and Attorney General, introduced Bill 88, The Saskatchewan First Act, for First Reading in Saskatchewan’s Legislative Assembly. Bill 88 is comprised of a lengthy preamble and three separate parts. Part 1 is entitled “Preliminary Matters and Constitutional Assertion”. Part 2 proposes amendments to the Constitution of Saskatchewan and Part 3 establishes an Economic Impact Assessment Tribunal. Continue reading →

The AER Quietly Implemented a Two-Tier Mandatory Closure Spend Target

By: Drew Yewchuk

Regulatory Change Commented On: The AER’s Inventory Reduction Program

 PDF Version: The AER Quietly Implemented a Two-Tier Mandatory Closure Spend Target

Starting in mid-2021, the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) adopted a new liability management framework to address the problems of inactive conventional oil and gas assets. The new liability management framework includes mandatory closure spend targets, a requirement for companies to spend a certain amount on closure work each year. The mandatory closure spend targets deal with the liabilities of inactive assets and not orphan assets (it is not to be confused with the orphan fund levy, used to fund the Orphan Well Association that abandons and remediates wells with owners that went bankrupt). Continue reading →

The Right to Your Day in Court

By: Kaye Booth

Case commented on: Heiser v Bowden Institution, 2022 ABCA 300 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Right to Your Day in Court

Courts have the responsibility to listen to the applications brought before them, especially when an individual’s liberty is at issue. On the other hand, courts have the inherent power to prevent the misuse of their procedures and to control proceedings. These two roles of the court may conflict with each other – if the court has the inherent power to label litigants as vexatious and prevent them from making further applications, how is this squared with the litigant’s right to access the court and the court’s duty to hear them? Continue reading →

The Oppression Remedy Tests: Oppression v Unfair Prejudice & Unfair Disregard

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case commented on: Wisser v CEM International Management Consultants Ltd, 2022 ABQB 414 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Oppression Remedy Tests: Oppression v Unfair Prejudice & Unfair Disregard

This blog broadly addresses how creditors can utilize the oppression remedy. It includes a specific discussion on the three tests in the oppression remedy. It will not address the issue of severance. Continue reading →

Confirmed in Law: The Decision-Maker for COVID-19 Public Health Orders in Alberta is the Chief Medical Officer of Health

By: Lorian Hardcastle and Shaun Fluker

Decision commented on: CM v Alberta, 2022 ABKB 716 (See here for the decision, which was not on CanLII as of the date of writing)

PDF Version: Confirmed in Law: The Decision-Maker for COVID-19 Public Health Orders in Alberta is the Chief Medical Officer of Health

In the winter of 2022, the Alberta government repealed the bulk of its COVID-19 public health measures in an effort to be among the first provinces to re-open. On February 8, 2022, the Premier announced that children would no longer be required to mask in school and, on that same day, the Minister of Education (Adriana LaGrange) issued a written statement that “school boards will not be empowered by provincial health order or recommendations from the CMOH to require ECS – grade 12 students to be masked to attend school in person or to ride a school bus.” Continue reading →