Page 6

Matter commented on: R c Montour, 2023 QCCS 4154 (CanLII)

PDF Version: A Misstep on the Road to Reconciliation

Critics of the Supreme Court of Canada’s definition of aboriginal rights in R v Van der Peet, 1996 CanLII 216 (SCC), [1996] 2 SCR 507 may applaud the Quebec Superior Court’s decision in R c Montour, 2023 QCCS 4154 (CanLII) that attempts to re-write this definition so that it conforms to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (the Declaration). But this post maintains that court-based battles of this kind do little to promote reconciliation. The Declaration will better promote reconciliation by being implemented through new treaties and federal legislation drafted in consultation with Indigenous peoples.

Agreement in Principle on a Revised Columbia River Treaty

By Nigel Bankes

On July 18, 2024

In International Law, Water Law

By: Nigel Bankes

Event commented on: Announcement of an Agreement in Principle on a Revised Columbia River Treaty, July 11, 2024

PDF Version: Agreement in Principle on a Revised Columbia River Treaty

Last week the governments of Canada and the United States announced that they had reached an agreement in principle (AiP) on a set of amendments to “modernize” the Columbia River Treaty (CRT). It has taken the parties over six years to reach this point. I have provided some background on the CRT and the launch of the renegotiation in previous ABlawg posts here and here. The parties have yet to provide the full text of the AiP but the Government of British Columbia has posted a backgrounder that summarizes the terms of the AiP as well as a useful Q & A page. Here is the text of the summary:

Let Them Eat Breakfast? Encampments on Campus Part 3

By Jonnette Watson Hamilton

On July 17, 2024

In Constitutional, Injunctions, Protest

By: Jonnette Watson Hamilton and Jennifer Koshan

Decision Commented On: University of Toronto (Governing Council) v Doe et al., 2024 ONSC 3755 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Let Them Eat Breakfast? Encampments on Campus Part 3

Stampede Week in Calgary just ended. Pancake breakfasts and other festivities went ahead despite a recent water emergency. At times like this, folks often point to Calgary’s can-do attitude. Indeed, some observers have suggested that this same can-do attitude prevailed, in a good way, when the University of Calgary (UCalgary) called in the Calgary Police Service (CPS) to enforce a trespass notice within less than 24 hours of an on-campus encampment being established on May 9, 2024 (see e.g., the comments of Councillor Terry Wong at the May Calgary Police Commission hearing at 46:13, 49:15). Who needs an expensive court-ordered injunction when the police are willing to heed the call of property owners? Well, the University of Toronto (U of T) decided that it did, seemingly because the Toronto police – unlike the CPS – refused to intervene without a court order in a 50+ day encampment on that campus (University of Toronto v Doe et al., 2024 ONSC 3755 (CanLII) at para 212). U of T got its interlocutory injunction on July 2 and then others, such as Memorial University (here), suggested that the U of T injunction decision supported their actions in removing protesters. We expect UCalgary will also rely on the U of T decision to justify its actions after the fact.

The Problem with Industry Control of the OWA, and OWA Control of Oil and Gas Insolvency

By Drew Yewchuk

On July 9, 2024

In Oil & Gas

By: Drew Yewchuk & Shaun Fluker

Regulatory Memo Commented On: Internal Alberta Energy Regulator Memorandum, Unintended Consequences of Ministerial Order 043/2023 in Insolvency April 11, 2024

PDF Version: The Problem with Industry Control of the OWA, and OWA Control of Oil and Gas Insolvency

The focus of this post is an internal memorandum written by the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) Orphaning and Insolvency team: the AER Memorandum on Unintended Consequences of Ministerial Order 043/2023 in Insolvency (the Unintended Consequences Memo). We describe a regulatory problem with potentially serious consequences for municipalities and the public that has not been disclosed to the public by the AER. The Unintended Consequences Memo was obtained in records obtained by the Faculty’s Public Interest Law Clinic in its ongoing closure liabilities access-to-information project under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP).

Submission on Family Violence Law to the Ministers of Arts, Culture and Status of Women, Children and Family Services, and Justice

By Jennifer Koshan

On July 8, 2024

In Family, Law Reform

By: Jennifer Koshan, Ampee Minhas, Athina Pantazopoulos & Sasha Reid

Legislation Commented On: Family Law Act, SA 2003, c F-4.5; Protection Against Family Violence Act, RSA 2000, c P-27

PDF Version: Submission on Family Violence Law to the Ministers of Arts, Culture and Status of Women, Children and Family Services, and Justice

Authors’ Note:

This law reform submission was delivered to the Government of Alberta, Ministers of Arts, Culture and Status of Women, Children and Family Services, and Justice, on July 8, 2024. Below we provide the Introduction to the submission, a full version of which is available here.