These articles by our expert team cover the details of various decisions made by the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER), Alberta Utilities Commision (AUC), and Canada Energy Regulator (CER). Browse our searchable archive below to learn more about the results we’ve achieved for our clients.
Link to Decision Summarized Download Summary in PDF Appeal – Standard of Review What standard of review applies when we determine whether a regulation is established within the scope of the enabling legislation? The reasonableness standard set out in Canada (Minister...
Link to Decision Summarized Download Summary in PDF Authority – Compensation Award Application On appeal from AltaLink Management Ltd. (“AML”), the Alberta Court of Appeal (“ABCA”) considered whether the Land and Property Rights Tribunal (the "Board") had the...
Link to Decision Summarized Download Summary in PDF Appeal – Production of Records Application Michael Judd ("Appellant") appealed a decision by the Alberta Energy Regulator (“AER”) that denied his pre-hearing motion in a regulatory appeal of a pipeline licence issued...
Link to Decision Summarized Download Summary in PDF Electricity - Appeal Application This was an appeal of a chambers judge decision (“Decision”) dismissing the originating application of ENMAX Corporation, ENMAX Energy Corporation and Calgary Energy Centre No. 2 Inc....
Link to Decision Summarized Appeal - Procedural Fairness Appeal This was an appeal by AltaLink Management Ltd. (“AML”), ATCO Electric Ltd. (“AE”), ENMAX Power Corp. (“ENMAX”) and EPCOR Distribution and Transmission Inc. (“EDTI”) from the AUC’s decision to eliminate...
Link to Decision Summarized Oil – Judicial Review/Appeal Appeal This was an appeal by the Alberta Minister of Energy (“Minister” or “Appellant”) from an Alberta Court of King’s Bench order on judicial review. The judicial review judge quashed the Minister’s screening...
Link to Decision Summarized Rates - Stranded Assets Application ATCO Electric Ltd. (“AE”) appealed AUC Decision 21609-D01-2019 regarding ATCO Electric Ltd., Z Factor Adjustment for the 2016 Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo Wildfire (the “Decision”). In the...
Link to Decision SummarizedElectricity - AppealAppealENMAX Energy Corporation (“ENMAX”) and the Balancing Pool (together, the “Appellants”), appealed an arbitration award finding that Keephills Generating Unit #1 was offline for 216 days as result of force majeure....
Link to Decision SummarizedTariffs - Cost AllocationIn this decision, the Alberta Court of Appeal (“ABCA”) considered the applications from FortisAlberta Inc. (“FortisAB”), EQUS REA Ltd. (“EQUS”), and the Alberta Federation of Rural Electrification Associations...
Link to Decision SummarizedDecommissioning Costs - Associated FacilitiesIn this decision, the Alberta Court of Appeal (“ABCA”) majority dismissed TransAlta Corporation (“TransAlta”)’s appeal of AUC Decision 23778-D01-2021, where the AUC decided that it was not bound...
Link to Decision SummarizedRegulatory Appeal - Irreparable HarmIn this decision, the Alberta Energy Regulator (“AER”) approved an application from the Lac Ste. Anne Métis community (“LSAM”) for an extension of the timeline to file a request for regulatory appeal...
Link to Decision SummarizedResponsibility for WellsIn this decision, the AER determined it is appropriate to reconsider, without a hearing, its 1985 decision to transfer responsibility for certain wells previously licensed to the Lloydminster Development Company...
Link to Decision SummarizedAppeal - Responsible Energy Development ActIn this decision, the AER denied a request under Section 38 of the Responsible Energy Development Act (“REDA”) for a regulatory appeal (the “Request”), filed by Clint and Ray Jacula (the “Jaculas”),...
Link to Decision SummarizedSurface Rights Board; Appeal; Compensation Payable In this matter, the Court granted an appeal a decision of the Alberta Surface Rights Board (“SRB”) in relation to the compensation payable to the Appellant arising from the presence of two...
Link to Decision SummarizedRates - Information Technology Costs In this decision, ATCO Electric Ltd. and ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd. (the “Applicants”) sought permission to appeal an AUC decision that allowed only part of the Applicants’ information technology (“IT”)...
In this decision, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) considered an appeal by the Mikisew Cree First Nation from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) in Canada (Governor General in Council) v. Mikisew Cree First Nation, 2016 FCA 311 (the “FCA Decision”).
The SCC dismissed the appeal (upholding the FCA Decision) on the grounds that judicial review to the Federal Court under the Federal Courts Act was not available for the actions of federal ministers in the parliamentary process.
The SCC allowed the appeal and quashed the NEB’s authorization. The SCC found that while the Crown may rely on the NEB’s process to fulfill its duty to consult, as also found in Thames, in this case, consultation and accommodation efforts were inadequate.
The SCC dismissed the appeal of the FCA Decision, thereby upholding the NEB’s approval of the Line 9 modification project.
Decision ReportFederal Work and Undertaking - Section 92(1)(a) – NEB Jurisdiction – Prima Facie Test In this decision, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) considered an appeal by Mr. Sawyer from an NEB decision (the “NEB Decision”). The NEB Decision subject to appeal...
The Tsleil-Waututh Nation (“TWN”) appealed from three interlocutory decisions of the NEB in the context of the NEB’s review of Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC (“TM”)’s application for the construction of a pipeline project (the “Project”).
The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (“CAPP”), the Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professionals (“CAIRP”), the Attorney General for Saskatchewan (“Saskatchewan”), Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia as represented by the Ministry of Natural Gas Development and the British Columbia (“BC”) Oil and Gas Commission (the “BC Applicants”) (collectively, the “Intervener Applicants”), sought leave from the Alberta Court of Appeal (“ABCA”) to participate as interveners in a Constitutional appeal concerning division of powers and the doctrine of paramountcy.
The FCA held that reliance on an administrative or regulatory tribunal can fulfill Canada’s duty to consult. However, the FCA held that because Canada planned further consultations beyond the FCA process, Canada had not inappropriately delegated or relied on the JRP process to fulfill its duty to consult. Accordingly, the FCA dismissed this alleged flaw in the consultation process, holding that Canada’s efforts were reasonable.
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) dismissed the appeal of ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd. and ATCO Electric Ltd. (collectively, “ATCO”) in respect of AUC Decision 2011-391. AUC Decision 2011-391 denied ATCO’s request to recover 100 percent of the annual consumer price index (“CPI”) cost of living adjustment (“COLA”) amounts as part of its pension costs for 2012 (the “AUC Decision”).
The Court dismissed the Utilities’ appeals of both the Utilties Asset Dispisotion Decision (AUC Decision 2013-417) and the 2011 Generic Cost of Capital Decision (AUC Decision 2011-474).
As the Court dismissed each of Clyde River’s three substantive grounds of appeal, the Court dismissed the appeals with costs.
Download ReportAppeal Denied - ATC This decision arises from four separate appeals filed by Saskatchewan Power Corporation and its subsidiary Northpoint Energy Solutions (“Saskpower”), British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority and its subsidiary, Powerex Corp. (“BC...