Are Regional (and other) Assessments pursuant to the Impact Assessment Act Justiciable? Ecology Action Centre v Canada (Part 1)

By: Martin Olszynski

PDF Version: Are Regional (and other) Assessments pursuant to the Impact Assessment Act Justiciable? Ecology Action Centre v Canada (Part 1)

Case Commented On: Ecology Action Centre v Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2021 FC 1367 (CanLII)

The applicants sought judicial review in Federal Court of the “Regional Assessment of Offshore Oil and Gas Exploratory Drilling East of Newfoundland and Labrador” (the Offshore Exploratory Regional Assessment), initiated as a “regional study” under the previous Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 52 (CEAA, 2012) but converted into a “regional assessment” under the current Impact Assessment Act, SC 2019, c 28, s 1 (IAA) when the latter came into force in 2019. The Offshore Exploratory Regional Assessment and Report were prepared by a committee established by both the federal and provincial governments and submitted to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada (the Minister). The applicants also sought judicial review of the subsequently promulgated Regulations Respecting Excluded Physical Activities (Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Exploratory Wells) (the Offshore Exploratory Regulations) pursuant to paragraph 112(1)(a.2) of the IAA, the effect of which was to exclude offshore exploratory drilling from undergoing individual impact assessments on a go-forward basis. Both applications were dismissed. Continue reading →

Judging Family Violence: Recommendations for Judicial Practices and Guidelines in Family Violence Cases

By: Deanne Sowter and Jennifer Koshan

PDF Version: Judging Family Violence: Recommendations for Judicial Practices and Guidelines in Family Violence Cases

There have been some recent legal developments that compel us to consider the role and responsibilities of judges in cases involving family violence. First, amendments to the Divorce Act, RSC 1985, c 3 (2nd Supp), came into effect in March 2021 and the Act now stipulates that family violence is a factor relevant to the best interests of the child. Family violence is finally recognized federally as germane to judicial decisions on parenting, though it is not explicitly recognized as relevant to whether negotiated settlements are an appropriate expectation, which has important implications for the judge’s role in this area. Second, there has been heightened attention to judicial education in the context of gender-based violence, most directly through Bill C-3 (Second Session, Forty-third Parliament). This Bill received Royal Assent in May 2021 and revised the Judges Act, RSC 1985, c J-1, such that in order to be eligible for appointment to superior courts, prospective judges undertake to participate in continuing education on sexual assault law and social context (s 3(b)). While limited to sexual violence, these amendments raise issues about judicial education that are relevant in the family violence context as well. Third, the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC) released its newly revised Ethical Principles for Judges (EPJ) in June 2021. The EPJ do not explicitly reference family violence, which is a concern, but there are also opportunities to interpret the EPJ to ensure that family violence considerations are front of mind for judges hearing cases or conducting judicial mediation. In this post, we consider these developments and make recommendations for judicial practices and guidelines that better reflect the gravity and context of family violence. Continue reading →

Interpreting the Generalized Duty of Good Faith in Insolvency Proceedings

By: Jassmine Girgis

PDF Version: Interpreting the Generalized Duty of Good Faith in Insolvency Proceedings

Case Commented On: CWB Maxium Financial Inc v 2026998 Alberta Ltd, 2021 ABQB 137 (CanLII)

In CWB Maxium Financial Inc v 2026998 Alberta Ltd, 2021 ABQB 137 (CanLII), the court considered the duty of good faith in the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3, s 4.2 [BIA], and the Personal Property Security Act, RSA 2000, c P-7, s 66(1) [PPSA], in relation to the plaintiff lenders seeking a final order of receivership against the defendant debtors. This post will focus on the duty in the context of insolvency. It will also comment on and contrast the equitable duty of fairness under the corporate oppression remedy. Continue reading →

Province of Alberta Issues a Request for Full Project Proposals For Carbon Sequestration Hubs

By: Nigel Bankes

PDF Version: Province of Alberta Issues a Request for Full Project Proposals For Carbon Sequestration Hubs

Document Commented On: Request for Full Project Proposals For Carbon Sequestration Hubs, December 2, 2021

Following an earlier announcement (Information Letter 2021-19) in May 2021 (commented on here) and then a call for Expressions of Interest (EOI) in September (commented on here, the link to the EOI is now broken and the EOI no longer seems to be available), the province has now moved to the next stage in developing its hub-based carbon capture and storage (CCS) policy with the issuance of a “Request for Full Project Proposals For Carbon Sequestration Hubs” (RFPP). This latest RFPP indicates that Continue reading →

Bill 77, Unpaid Municipal Taxes, and the Connection to the Inactive and Orphan Wells Problem

By: Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: Bill 77, Unpaid Municipal Taxes, and the Connection to the Inactive and Orphan Wells Problem

Bill Commented On: Alberta’s Bill 77: Municipal Government (Restoring Tax Accountability) Amendment Act, 2021, 2nd Session, 30th Legislature

Alberta’s Bill 77: Municipal Government (Restoring Tax Accountability) Amendment Act, 2021 (2nd Session, 30th Legislature) is moving towards becoming law. This post describes what Bill 77 would do, explains the connection between oil and gas companies’ unpaid municipal taxes and Alberta’s orphan well problem, and describes some reasons why Bill 77 will be ineffective. Continue reading →