ABLawg

Regulatory Bulletin Commented On: Alberta Energy Regulator, Bulletin 2025-32, Invitation for Feedback on Proposed Revisions to Closure Nomination Requirements in Directive 088

PDF Version: A Review of Closure Nomination for Inactive Oil and Gas Sites and AER Updates to Directive 088

The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) is taking comments on some proposed changes to the process for nominating oil and gas sites (facilities and wells) for closure work. The comment period is open until November 12, 2025. The AER’s closure nomination system has been in place since April 2023, and one of us commented on its commencement in Updates to the Oil and Gas Liability Management Framework: The New Closure Nomination and The Renamed Closure Quotas. The proposed changes adjust the timelines for the closure nomination. In particular, they shorten the timeline for nominated sites that had already been decommissioned to complete a phase 1 environmental site assessment from three years to one year, and they extend all closure nomination timelines to the end of the quarter-year. This post reviews the public information on the closure nomination process so far, discusses the AER’s proposed changes, and assesses the effectiveness of the closure nomination process so far.

Taking Stock of the Grassy Mountain Project and Other Coal Matters: Update 4, October 2025

By Nigel Bankes

On October 23, 2025

In Administrative Law, Energy, Environmental, Natural Resources, Responsible Energy Development Act

By: Nigel Bankes & Drew Yewchuk

Cases and Decisions Commented On: Northback Holdings Corporation v. Alberta Energy and Joint Review Panel For the Grassy Mountain Coal Project acting in its capacity as the Alberta Energy Regulator, 2025 CanLII 99179 (SCC) and Northback Holdings Corporation v. Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2025 FCA 31 (CanLII).

PDF Version: Taking Stock of the Grassy Mountain Project and Other Coal Matters: Update 4, October 2025

In addition to ABlawg’s coal law and policy series and the Coal Law and Policy ebook, we have provided occasional posts updating readers on the status of the Grassy Mountain Coal project and the related litigation. As the title of the post suggests, this is the fourth update following earlier updates in February 2024, August 2024, and June 2025.

Benga, now known as Northback, first applied for permits for the Grassy Mountain Coal Project in May 2015 (GM.1). A Joint Review Panel (JRP) consisting of federal and provincial regulators held a hearing from October 2020 to January 2021. The JRP report in June 2021 denied provincial permits for the project and in August 2021, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change denied federal permits for the project. Recognizing that the project requires both federal and provincial permits, Northback brought litigation relating to the provincial permits in Alberta courts and litigation relating to the federal permits in federal courts in its efforts to get the project approved. In order to revisit the JRP report and decision and revive GM.1, Northback needed to succeed with its litigation in both the Alberta courts and the federal courts. The most recent developments confirm that all of Northback’s attacks on the provincial decision-making have failed and GM.1 is dead and buried. While there is some outstanding litigation in the federal courts relating to GM.1, even if Northback or the First Nation applicants are successful, the remaining litigation cannot obtain the permits necessary for GM.1 to proceed.

Treaty-Making in Australia and Considerations for Canada

By Robert Hamilton

On October 22, 2025

In Indigenous, Reconciliation, Treaty Rights

By: Robert Hamilton and Harry Hobbs

Matter Commented On: Victoria’s Statewide Treaty and Statewide Treaty Bill 2025

PDF Version: Treaty-Making in Australia and Considerations for Canada

Indigenous peoples in Australia have long sought to establish treaty relationships with the state. While important advocacy efforts such as the 1988 Barunga Statement and the final report of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation in 2000 failed to lead to negotiations at the national level, a statewide treaty was recently signed in the state of Victoria. The first formal Indigenous treaty ever negotiated in Australian history, the Victorian Statewide Treaty is a novel model of treaty that is worth considering closely in Canada, particularly as Indigenous peoples and federal, provincial, and territorial governments continue to look for productive ways to implement historic and modern treaty promises and craft novel forms of agreement. Creative thinking is required to take steps to meet the Crown’s constitutional obligations to diligently implement treaty promises, proactively assess and manage cumulative impacts on Aboriginal and treaty rights, meaningfully implement modern treaty and self-government agreements, and satisfy its obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Recent discussions about the relationship between treaty rights and a secession referendum in Alberta (which one of us discussed here) also illustrate the importance of thinking creatively about the relationship between Indigenous self-determination, treaty rights, and other democratic state process and institutions. This blog summarizes Victoria’s Statewide Treaty and the proposed bill that will implement it.

A Mugging on Bay Street

By Bryce Tingle

On October 17, 2025

In Corporate / Commercial, Securities, Tax

By: Bryce C. Tingle KC

Case Commented On: The RRSP Trust of James T. Grenon by its Trustee CIBC Trust Corporation v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2025 FCA 129 (CanLII)

PDF Version: A Mugging on Bay Street

Most corporate lawyers avoid reading tax court decisions. Tax is a pretty specialized practice area, and for non-specialists the entire area of tax law gives off the insalubrious air of a dark alley in an unfamiliar city. Except worse, because in a tax case you know for a fact there is someone down that alley who wants to rob you of your money.

Corporate lawyers should make an exception, however, for the recent decision in The RRSP Trust of James T. Grenon by its Trustee CIBC Trust Corporation v. Her Majesty the Queen (Grenon) by the Federal Court of Appeal. This is because the court finds itself interpreting provincial securities laws in a way that would be very surprising to most non-tax lawyers. In fact, the way the court (i) interprets the term “principal” (found in many private placement exemptions), (ii) the consequences that it suggests follow from imprecise investor representations in subscription agreements, and (iii) the way the court determines what constitutes a “lawful” offering under RRSP rules, all violate long-established securities practice and threaten to destabilize private placements of all kinds.

The Non-Justiciable War on ‘Woke’ at the Law Society of Alberta

By Drew Yewchuk

On October 16, 2025

In Ethics and the Legal Profession

By: Drew Yewchuk

Decision Commented On: Song v The Law Society of Alberta, 2025 ABKB 525 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Non-Justiciable War on ‘Woke’ at the Law Society of Alberta

Back in February 2023, a group of Alberta lawyers petitioned for a special meeting of the Law Society of Alberta (LSA) to hold a vote seeking to remove the LSA’s powers to require its members to engage in continuing professional development and specifically, remove the requirement to complete an Indigenous cultural competency program called ‘The Path’. The petition was defeated at that special meeting: 2,609 votes against the resolution to 864 votes in favour of the resolution. See the ABlawg posts about the special meeting: Law Society of Alberta to Hold a Special Meeting to Debate its Power to Mandate Indigenous Cultural Competency Training and Fighting Over History at a Special Meeting of the Law Society of Alberta.