ABLawg

Case Commented On: Alberta Securities Commission v Hennig, 2021 ABCA 411 (CanLII)

In this decision, the Alberta Court of Appeal (CA) considered whether a debt fell within the exceptions contained in s 178(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 (BIA), and therefore survived the discharge of the bankrupt.

The CA allowed the appeal. The majority reasons were written by Justice Ritu Khullar and concurred in by Justice Jack Watson. Justice Dawn Pentelechuk wrote reasons concurring in the result.

The December 2021 Mine Financial Security Program Standard

By Drew Yewchuk

On January 13, 2022

In Energy, Oil & Gas

By: Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: The December 2021 Mine Financial Security Program Standard

Regulatory Document Commented On: The December 23, 2021 Mine Financial Security Program Standard

In a post back in May 2021, I mentioned a quietly made change to Alberta’s Mine Financial Security Program (MFSP), which sets out the security requirements for coal and oil sands mines in Alberta:

ABlawg: Year in Review 2021

By Admin

On December 31, 2021

In Announcements

By: Admin

PDF Version: ABlawg: Year in Review 2021

ABlawg is pleased to provide this compilation of highlights from 2021, consisting of some statistics and synthesis of our bloggers’ contributions in substantive areas of law.

Reviewing Regulations Post-Vavilov: Ecology Action Centre v Canada (Part II)

By Mark Mancini

On December 24, 2021

In Administrative Law, Environmental

By: Mark Mancini and Martin Olszynski

PDF Version: Reviewing Regulations Post-Vavilov: Ecology Action Centre v Canada (Part II)

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

This is the second post on the Federal Court’s recent decision in Ecology Action Centre v Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2021 FC 1367 (CanLII). For the background on this decision, see Martin Olszynski’s first post here.

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

By Martin Olszynski

On December 22, 2021

In Administrative Law, Environmental

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.